DPP -v- Power [2007] IESC 31 (26 July 2007)

DPP -v- Power [2007] IESC 31 (26 July 2007)

Section 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, as inserted by section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999, does not require the prosecution to prove that the accused knew or ought to have known that the market value of the controlled drugs amounted to €13,000 or more; the value is an objective element to be established by evidence, not by proof of knowledge.

Citation
[2007] IESC 31
Parties
Prosecutor/respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Appellant: Ronan Power
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
26 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Criminal Appeal to Supreme Court Under Section 29 of the Courts of Justice Act 1924
Outcome
appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed
Legal Topics
Mens Rea, Statutory Interpretation, Drug Offences, Burden of Proof
Criminal Law Mens Rea Statutory Interpretation Drug Offences Burden of Proof

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 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecutor/respondent

Ronan Power

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Criminal Appeal to Supreme Court Under Section 29 of the Courts of Justice Act 1924

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether, in a prosecution under section 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977 (as inserted by section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999), the prosecution must prove that the accused knew or ought to have known that the market value of the controlled drugs amounted to €13,000 or more.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, as inserted by section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999, does not require the prosecution to prove that the accused knew or ought to have known that the market value of the controlled drugs amounted to €13,000 or more; the value is an objective element to be established by evidence, not by proof of knowledge.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed