DPP v Yamanoha
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 07 February 1994 |
| Date | 07 February 1994 |
| Docket Number | [1993 No. 53 C.C.A.] |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Ireland) |
Court of Criminal Appeal
Criminal law - Search warrant - Validity - Power to issue search warrant - Requirement that peace commissioner be satisfied by information on oath of reasonable grounds for suspecting that an offence was committed - Information deposing to garda having reasonable grounds for suspecting that an offence was committed - Additional oral information given by garda - Whether such information sworn - Whether warrant validly issued - Misuse of Drugs Act, 1977 (No. 12), s. 26 - Misuse of Drugs Act, 1984 (No. 18), s. 13.
Section 26, sub-s. 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1977, as amended by s. 13 of the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1984, provides, inter alia:—
"(1) If a [Judge] of the District Court or a Peace Commissioner is satisfied by information on oath of a member of the Garda Síochána that there is reasonable ground for suspecting that - "
-
(a) a person is in possession in contravention of this Act on any premises of a controlled drug . . . and that such drug . . . is on a particular premises . . .
such [Judge] or Commissioner may issue a search warrant mentioned in subsection (2) of this section."
A peace commissioner, issued a search warrant pursuant to s. 26 of the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1977, authorising Detective Sergeant D. to enter and search a hotel room in Dublin. The warrant recited that the peace commissioner was satisfied by the information on oath of the detective sergeant that there was reasonable ground for suspecting that a person was in possession of certain controlled drugs at the premises in question. The information on oath on foot of which the warrant was issued stated: "I am a member of the Garda Síochána and I have reasonable grounds for suspecting that a person is in possession in contravention of the Misuse of Drugs Acts, 1977 and 1984, of a controlled drug . . . This is as a result of confidential information and surveillance over a number of hours by members of the Garda Síochána".
Following a search of the premises the applicant was charged with a number of offences under the Misuse of Drugs Acts. At her trial in the Circuit Court, counsel on behalf of the applicant submitted that the information upon oath, insofar as it was confined to reciting that the detective sergeant had reasonable grounds for suspecting that a person was in possession of controlled drugs at the premises in contravention of the Acts, did not constitute a proper information such as would enable a peace commissioner personally to be satisfied that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting the matters referred to in s. 26, sub-s. 1 (a) of the Act of 1977, and that accordingly, the search warrant was invalid and the evidence as to search was inadmissible. In response to this submission, evidence was called on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions to the effect that Detective Sergeant D. had given additional oral information to the peace commissioner as to the basis for his suspicion. Detective Sergeant D. gave evidence that this oral information was given after he had taken the oath; the peace commissioner, however, stated in evidence that it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
DPP v Cash
...IR 142 DPP, PEOPLE v SHAW 1982 IR 1 CURTIN v CLERK OF DAIL EIREANN & ORS 2006 2 ILRM 99 2006 IESC 14 CONSTITUTION ART 40.5 DPP v YAMANOHA 1994 1 IR 565 1999 9 2230 MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT 1984 DPP v DILLON 2002 4 IR 501 2003 1 ILRM 531 2002 9 1993 INTERCEPTION OF POSTAL PACKETS & TELECOMMUNICA......
-
Min for Justice v Makuch
...MONTGOMERY v LONEY 1959 NI 171 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1955 S39(1) HARRISON v HILL 1932 JC 13 ELKINS v CARTLEDGE 1947 1 AER 829 DPP v YAMANOHA 1994 IR 565 R v BASSETT 2009 1 WLR 1032 BUCHANAN v MOTOR INSURERS BUREAU 1955 WLR 488 SANDY v MARTIN 1974 CRIM LR 263 MARSH v ARSCOTT 1982 75 CR APP R 211......
-
Kevin Braney v Ireland and the Attorney General
...to the premises in respect of which they issued the warrant; The People (DPP) v Kenny [1990] 2 IR 110, The People (DPP) v Yamanoha [1994] 1 IR 565. There is a further advantage to having a police officer extend detention, which is that the District Court is a court of record and it is there......
-
The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v J.C.
...change. DPP v. Yamanoha 71 A further example of the elision between illegality and constitutionality is to be found in DPP v. Yamanoha [1994] 1 I.R. 565. The accused was detected by members of An Garda Siochana in possession of a very large quantity of cocaine, contrary to the Misuse of Dru......
-
Overruling the protectionist exclusionary rule
...IR294; People (DPP) vHealy [1990] 2 IR 73; [1990] ILRM 313.11. [1990] 2 IR 110 at 134.12. Ibid.13. See, for example, DPP vYamanoha [1994] 1 IR 565; DPP vConnell [1995] 1 IR 244; People (DPP) vDillon [2002] 4 IR 501;and People (DPP) vLaide and Ryan [2005] 1 IR 209. For more on the Irish excl......
-
Truth To Be Told: Understanding Truth In The Age Of Post-Truth Politics
...71The People (DPP) v Madden [1977] IR 336 (SC). 72The People (DPP) v Kenny [1990] 2 IR 110 (SC). 73The People (DPP) v Elizabeth Yamanoah [1994] 1 IR 565 (CCA). 74Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Article 24(2) of the Charter provides: ‘Where, in proceedings … a court concludes that e......