State (Langan) v Donoghue

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 05 April 1974
• Docket Number: [1970. No. 166 SS.]
• Date: 05 April 1974
• Court: Supreme Court

Supreme Court

[1970. No. 166 SS.]

The State (Langan) v. Donoghue

THE STATE (at the Prosecution of JOSEPH PATRICK LANGAN)

and

DENIS DONOGHUE

Criminal law - Sentence - Penal servitude - Prisoner admitted to bail pending habeas corpus application - Expiration of sentence.

Appeal from the High Court.

The prosecutor, Joseph Patrick Langan, was convicted on indictment in the Central Criminal Court on the 2nd February, 1970, for housebreaking and larceny contrary to s. 26 (1) of the Larceny Act, 1916, and on the 9th February he was sentenced by Murnaghan J. to three years penal servitude. The warrant in execution of the sentence was dated the 9th February, 1970, and was addressed to the Governor of Mountjoy Prison; the warrant commanded the said governor to receive the body of the prosecutor and to cause him to undergo the sentence appearing opposite his name. The sentence appearing opposite the prosecutor's name on the same form (P.25) was:—"To be kept to penal servitude for a period of three years from this date (9.2.70) . . ." The prosecutor was imprisoned in Mountjoy Prison pursuant to the warrant but was then transferred to Portlaoise Prison pursuant to an order made by the Minister for Justice on the 6th October, 1970.

On the 17th December, 1969, the High Court (Pringle J.) had made an order granting the prosecutor free legal aid pursuant to s. 3, sub-s. 2, of the Criminal Justice (Legal Aid) Act, 1962, and assigning to the prosecutor a named solicitor who was given liberty to retain one counsel. Section 3, sub-s. 2, of the Act of 1962 provides that a legal-aid certificate shall be granted in respect of a person returned for trial for an indictable offence only if (a) an application is made for such certificate and it appears to the judge that the means of the accused are insufficient to enable him to obtain legal aid and (b) the accused has been returned for trial on a charge of murder or it appears to the judge that, "having regard to all the circumstances of the case (including the nature of such defence (if any) as may have been set up), it is essential in the interests of justice that the person should have legal aid in the preparation and conduct of his defence at the trial." The prosecutor, against the advice of his assigned solicitor, decided to plead "not guilty" to the charge under s. 26 of the Act of 1916; in addition the prosecutor wished to give sworn testimony at his trial to controvert the evidence to be adduced on behalf of the Attorney General. The solicitor believed that the prosecutor was guilty of the offence charged and was under the impression that it would be improper for him, as such solicitor, to call his client to give evidence on oath. The solicitor explained these difficulties to the High Court (Murnaghan J.) and on the 13th January, 1970, the solicitor was released from his assignment. Consequently, at his trial on the 2nd February, 1970, the prosecutor was not represented by counsel or solicitor.

On the 11th May, 1970, the Court of Criminal Appeal (McLoughlin, Henchy and Pringle JJ.) refused an application by the prosecutor for leave to appeal against his conviction; at the hearing of that application the prosecutor was represented by solicitor and counsel.

On the 14th January, 1971, the High Court (O'Keeffe P.) refused an...