The State (Sherry) v Wine

JurisdictionIreland
CourtSupreme Court
JudgeMcCARTHY J.
Judgment Date01 January 1985
Neutral Citation1984 WJSC-SC 1702
Date01 January 1985
Docket Number(115-1983)

1984 WJSC-SC 1702

THE SUPREME COURT

Griffin J.

Hederman J.

McCarthy J.

(115-1983)
State (SHERRY) v WINE
THE STATE (SHERRY)
.v.
DISTRICT JUSTICE HUBERT WINE

Subject Headings:

CRIMINAL LAW: return for trial

1

JUDGMENT delivered the 7th day of June 1984by McCARTHY J. [NEM DISS]

2

These proceedings arise out of a preliminary examination of indictable offences pursuant to the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967. This was an Act passed expressly "to establish a new procedure for the preliminary examination of indictable offences and for this and other purposes to amend criminal law and administration". In doing so, it repealed the provisions of the Indictable Offences (Ireland) Act, 1849, which referred to the Dublin Metropolitan District, and of the Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851, relevant to the remainder of the country, as well as provisions of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914, the Courts of Justice Act, 1936, and the Criminal Justice Act, 1951. The original procedure was examined by Lavery J. in The People v.Boggan (1958) I.R. 67, byDavitt P. in The State (Shanahan) v. The Attorney General (1964) I.R. 239 and authoritatively identified as the exercise of the judicial power of the State by the District Court in The State (C) v. Minister for Justice (1967) I.R. 106. The effect of the Act of 1967 was not, in anyway, to alter the judicial quality of the proceedings in the District Court, but, rather, as the Act said, to establish a new procedure. That procedure is contained in Part II of the Act which, so far as relevant to this case, provides as follows:-

3

2 "5. - (1) Where an accused person is before the District Court charged with an indictable offence, then, unless the case is being tried summarily or the accused pleads guilty, the justice shall conduct a preliminary examination of the charge in accordance with the provisions of this Part.

4

(2) References in any enactment to the preliminary investigation of an indictable offence shall be construed as references to the procedure set out in this Part.

5

6. - (1) The prosecutor shall cause the following documents to be served on the accused...

6

(c) a list of the witnesses whom it is proposed to call at thetrial,

7

(d) a statement of the evidence that is to be given by each of them...

8

(4) The prosecutor may cause to be served on the accused and furnished to the Court a further statement of the evidence to be given by any witness a statement of whose evidence has already been supplied.

9

7. - (1) The justice shall consider the documents and exhibits, any deposition or statement taken in accordance with this section and any submissions that may be made by or on behalf of the prosecutor or theaccused.

10

(2) The prosecutor and the accused shall each be entitled to give evidence on sworn deposition and also to require the attendance before the justice of any person, whether included in the supplied list of witnesses or not, and to examine him by way of sworn deposition.

11

(3) A witness under subsection (2) may be cross-examined and re-examined on his evidence. His deposition shall be taken down in writing, read over to him and signed by him and by thejustice...

12

8. - (1) If the justice is of opinion that there is a sufficient case to put the accused on trial for the offence with which he has been charged, he shall send him forward for trial...

13

2 12.- (1) The accused may waive the preliminary investigation and elect to be sent forward for trialwith a plea of not guilty, unless the prosecutor requires the attendance of a witness under section 7(2) ...

14

14 - (1) Where, on the application of the prosecutor or an accused person, a justice of the District Court is of opinion that a prospective witness may be unable to attend or be prevented from attending to give evidence at the trial of the accused and that it is necessary in the interests of justice to take his evidence by way of sworn deposition, he may order accordingly.

15

(2) The deposition shall be taken in the presence of a justice of the District Court and of the accused. It shall be taken down in writing, read over to the deponent and signed by him and by thejustice.

16

(3) Before the deposition is taken, the justice shall inform the accused of the circumstances in which it may be read as evidence at histrial.

17

(4) The deponent may be cross-examined and re-examined on hisevidence.

18

15. - (1) A deposition taken under section 7 or 14 may, subject to subsection (2), be read as evidence at the trial of the accused if it is proved that-

19

(a) the deponent is dead or unable to attend or prevented from attending to give evidence atthe trial, and

20

(b) the deposition was taken in the presence of the accused,and

...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Kennedy v Judge Nolan & DPP
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 19 March 2013
    ...PROCEDURE ACT 1999 4E(4) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 1999 S4(A)(1) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 1999 S4F(2) SHERRY, STATE v DISTRICT JUSTICE WINE 1985 ILRM 196 1984/5/1702 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1999 S4F(1) DPP v L (D) UNREP CCC 19.7.2002 2002/9/2131 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 1999 S4G(1) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE......
  • O'Shea v O'Buachalla
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 24 May 2001
    ...STATE V KENNEDY 1977 IR 193 KILLEEN V DPP 1998 ILRM 1 ANISMOUR LTD V FREIGHT COMPENSATION FUND 1969 2 AL 147 SHERRY, STATE V WINE 1985 ILRM 196 KILEEN V DPP 1998 1 ILRM 1 DPP V WINDLE 2000 1 ILRM 75 HEALY, STATE V BALLAGH UNREP FINLAY 22.4.1983 1983/9/2691 HOLLAND, STATE V JUSTICE KENNE......
  • O'C v DPP
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 6 July 2000
    ... 1970 IR 27 O'KEEFFE V COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS UNREP SUPREME 24.3.1980 1980/9/1610 SHEEHAN V AMOND 1982 IR 235 SHERRY V WINE 1985 ILRM 196 AG'S REFERENCE (NO 1 OF 1990), IN RE 1992 3 AER 169 AG OF HONG KONG V CHEUNG 1994 1 AC 1 F V DPP UNREP CCA 2.12.1996 (NOT AVAILABLE) CRIMINAL LA......
  • Hughes v Judge Garavan
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 18 December 2003
    ...1963 IR 79 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 1967 S7 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 1967 S8 HOLLAND, STATE V KENNEDY 1977 IR 193 SHERRY, STATE V WINE 1985 ILRM 196 AG, PEOPLE V O'BRIEN 1963 IR 65 DALY, STATE V RUANE 1988 ILRM 117 KILLEEN V DPP 1998 1 ILRM 1 DAVIDSON, STATE V FARRELL 1960 IR 438 ANISMINIC LTD ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT