The Gazette 1977

power to require repetition of full account given — Offences Against the State Act, 1939, s. 52 - (5-8/1976 - C.C.A. - 16/11/76). The People (D.P.P.) v. Madden A Ors. Procedure District Court - Plea of guilty - Indictable offence — Court empowered to send accused forward for sentence to the court to which accused, if he had pleaded not guilty, could lawfully "have been sent forward for trial" — Certificate of Attorney General issued under s. 46(1) of Act of 1939 - Accused sent forward properly for sentence under Act of 1967 to Special Criminal Court - Habeas corpus — Offences against the State Act, 1939, s. 13 (2) (b) - (1976 No. 26 SS - Butler J. 16/2/76). The People (A.G.) v. Littlgjohn. Procedure District Court — Plea of guilty — Indictable offence — Court empowered to send accused forward for sentence to the court to which accused, if he had pleaded not guilty, could lawfully "have been sent forward for trial" — Certificate of Attorney General issued under s. 46 (1) of Act of 1939 - Certificate valid - Accused sent forward properly for sentence under Act of 1967 to Special Criminal Court — Habeas corpus — Offences against the State Act, 1939, s. 46 (1) - Criminal Procedure Act, 1967, s. 13 (2) (b) - (19/74 & 25/76 - Supreme Court - 18/3/76). The State (Littlejohn) v. Governor of Mountfoy Prison. Prosecution Authority to initiate — Summary charges brought by police in the name of The People and at the suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions — No authority to prosecute given by D.P.P. —District Justice having no power to determine charges — (1976 No. 58 SS - McMahon J. - 10/12/76). The People (DPT.) v. Roddy. Road Traffic Alcohol test — Blood sample — Statutory procedure mandatory —Certificate of result of test not stating that certain requirements satisfied — Onus on prosecution to prove aliunde omitted matters — Failure of proof — Adjournment refused — Complaint dismissed — Decision upheld - (103/75 — Supreme Caution — Failure to provide blood specimen — Statutory defence if defendant shows that he has not been cautioned in the prescribed manner of "the possible effects of his refusal or failure" — Defendant cautioned in accordance with regulations — Caution informing defendant that he would be liable to be prosecuted for an offence under s. 30 of Act of 1968 — Defendant prosecuted and convicted under that section — Caution failing to inform defendant that on conviction he would be disqualified from holding driving licence for minimum period of one year — "Possible effects" not equivalent of "possible consequences" — Conviction valid — Attorney General v. Jordan 107 I.L.T.R. 112 overruled - Case stated - (33/1976 - Supreme Court 8/4/76). Grogan v. Byrne. Road Traffic Insurance — Complaint that defendant was Court - 29/7/76). Verdon v. Dowries. Road Traffic

policeman in civilian clothes — Policeman shot dead by female accused — Ample evidence that deceased was acting in the course of duty suspecting the commission of a felony —Ample evidence of common design to resist arrest by force of arms — No rule of law prohibiting trial of other offences at trial for murder — No mistrial on ground that member of Special Criminal Court had adjudicated at trial of accused for criminal offence on previous occasion — Wife's defence that she acted under coercion of husband not applicable to charge of murder — Not necessary for accused to be in court when sentence pronounced as proceedings relayed to accused — Accused failing to avail of chance to address court on sentence — Capital murder not a new offence but a statutory retention of an old offence and its punishment — Leave to appeal to Supreme Court on point of law - (1976 Nos. 20 & 21 - Court of Criminal Appeal - 29/7/76). The People (D.PP.) v. Murray. Murder Capital murder —Whether a new offence — Mens rea — Whether prosecution must prove that accused knew that deceased was a policeman acting in the course of his duty — Criminal Justice Act, 1964, s.l - (137- 8/1976 - Supreme Court - 9/12/76). The People (DPP.) v. Murray. Offence Planning permission — Change of user — Permission granted for use as "fried fish and chip shop" — Condition imposed that user should not occur between 11 p.m. and 8 a.m. — Permission not required for use as chip shop — Prosecution for alleged user outside authorised hours in contravention of permission — Evidence that witnesses bought "fish and chips" — No evidence that fish was fried fish — Case stated by District Justice - Held that no satisfactory evidence that shop used as fried fish shop — However, imposition of condition in regard to hours of use as chip shop was a valid imposition or condition in granting permission for use as fried fish shop notwithstanding permission for use as chip shop not required — Further, the ordinary meaning of "chip" was "a fried slice of potato" and so there had been evidence to support a conviction in regard to user as chip shop - (1976 No. 36 SS - Finlay P. - 1/6/76). Corporation of Dublin v. Raso. Offence Proof — Control of foot and mouth disease — Failure to comply with Prohibition Notice served on defendant by veterinary inspector - Notice prohibiting defendant from entering upon specified lands — Notice authorised if inspector "has reason to believe" that the movement of any person may be attended with risk of spread of disease — Conviction in District Court without evidence of inspector - Appeal to Circuit Court - Case stated - Necessary for prosecution to prove that inspector had reason to believe and believed the relevant matters — Appeal Court still having discretion to admit missing evidence being a procedural matter — Foot and Mouth Disease Order, 1956, Article 19 - (113/ 1974 - Supreme Court - 5/4/76). The Attorney General (Corbett) v. Hajford. Police Interrogation —Suspect required to give full account of his movements — Whether any

fishing or an attempt to fish - (1976 No. 220 SS - Finlay P. - 27/7/76). The State (Neculai) v. McCourt. Imprisonment Transfer to mental hospital — Whether original offence excused by state of mind — (59/1976 - Supreme Court - 14/10/76). The State (Heany) v. Central Mental Hospital. Infant Enquiry as to age — Child or young person charged with offence — Procedure governed by age of accused — Statute giving jurisdiction to court even if it was mislead by answer given to enquiry — Statute not applicable where answer to enquiry not given on oath — Section 123 of Children's Act, 1908 - (1976 No. 133 SS - Finlay P. - 30/7/76). The State (Kenny) v. Ó hUadhalgh. Infant Sentence — Child or young person — Imprisonment prohibited unless court certifies that accused of unruly or depraved character so as not to be suitable for detention in place provided by Children's Act, 1908 — Charge and conviction for assault — Evidence adduced in support of charge not sufficient or appropriate to ground certificate — Enquiry required into general character of accused before certificate can be given — (1976 No. 207 SS - Hamilton J. - 29/7/76). The State (Holland) v. Kennedy. Jury Selection of panel — Conviction after trial before judge and jury — Leave to appeal refused —Habeas corpus proceedings raising issue of validity of conviction on ground that provisions of Juries Act, 1927, declared unconstitutional by Supreme Court in other proceedings during trial of accused — Members of jury all qualified and no objection by applicant at trial to method of selecting jury panel —Conviction valid and habeas corpus refused - (1976 No. 197 SS - High Court - 12/7/76). The People (Byrne) v. Governor of Mountfoy Prison. Legal Advice Detainee — Suspect being questioned in police station — Right to legal advice — Procurement of such advice — (1976 No. 439 SS - Finlay P. 14/12/76). The State (Harrington) v. Commissioner of Garda Síochána. Legal Aid Failure — Accused granted certificate for free legal aid — Conviction after trial at which accused not represented — Conviction set aside — Duty of court to inform accused of his right to apply for legal aid — (141, 143, 144/75 - Supreme Court - 22/7/76). The State (Foran A Healy) v. O'Reilly. Legal Aid Police — Interrogation of suspect — Police not obliged to obtain legal assistance for suspect in absence of request - (5-8/1976 - C.C.A. - 16/11/76). The People (DPP.) v. Madden A Ors. Murder Capital murder — Joint trial of husband and wife — Armed robbery —Accused escaping after robbery — Accused chased by 4