D.P.P. v. O'Shea [1989] IECCA 1 (28 July 1989)

D.P.P. v. O'Shea [1989] IECCA 1 (28 July 1989)

The answers given by Chief Superintendent Ginty, though not explicitly using the word 'suspicion', indicated he retained a definite suspicion of the applicant's guilt and relied on information from subordinates, satisfying evidentiary requirements for the extension order.

Citation
[1989] IECCA 1
Parties
Prosecution: Director of Public Prosecutions; Applicant: Gerald O'Shea
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
28 July 1989
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Robbery, Firearms Offences, Detention Extension, Evidentiary Requirements
Criminal Law Robbery Firearms Offences Detention Extension Evidentiary Requirements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecution

Gerald O'Shea

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of Chief Superintendent's suspicion was required for valid extension of detention under Section 30 of the Offences Against the State Act 1939
  2. 2 Whether refusal to dismiss at close of prosecution case was lawful given alleged lack of evidence of suspicion

Ratio Decidendi

The answers given by Chief Superintendent Ginty, though not explicitly using the word 'suspicion', indicated he retained a definite suspicion of the applicant's guilt and relied on information from subordinates, satisfying evidentiary requirements for the extension order.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal refused