The Court of Appeal has dismissed Daniel Wyse’s appeal against his conviction for Misuse of Drugs Act offences, including an offence under section 15A. The judgment, delivered on 15 July 2020, dealt only with conviction; the separate appeal against sentence remained live.
Wyse was convicted after a three-day trial in the Circuit Criminal Court in Cork on 20 November 2015. He was sentenced on 23 February 2016 to ten years’ imprisonment on each count, with the final 18 months suspended. The Court of Appeal did not decide the sentence appeal in this judgment.
The charges arose from events on 15 February 2014. Gardaí tried to stop a Vitara Jeep driven by Wyse. The judgment says he made a U-turn in a cul-de-sac, attempted to pass a patrol car by driving onto an embankment, and collided with it. Gardaí found a package in the front passenger foot-well. It contained 248.5 grams of diamorphine, which the judgment valued at €37,275. A passenger, John Heaphy, later pleaded guilty.
The appeal challenged the refusal to direct an acquittal, the judge’s treatment of circumstantial evidence, and the labelling and packaging of the drugs exhibit. The court also considered a request for a second counsel. It said the information put before the trial judge did not provide a basis to require that appointment, and rejected the argument that the absence of second counsel undermined trial fairness.
On the request for an acquittal, the Court of Appeal said the case was properly left to the jury. It noted that Wyse was driving the car and the package was in the passenger compartment, and that the jury could consider his driving and interview explanations when assessing whether he knew of and controlled the drugs. The court said conviction was not inevitable, but a properly directed jury could convict.
The court found no general requirement to warn juries against convicting on circumstantial evidence. It considered the trial judge’s directions appropriate to this case, which it did not regard as a classic circumstantial-evidence case. It also rejected the challenge to the exhibit’s chain of custody. Although officers’ statements contained different numbers for an evidence bag, the court said there was no doubt the item found in the car was the same one delivered to the Forensic Science Laboratory and analysed as heroin.
The court concluded that none of the grounds caused it to doubt the trial’s fairness or the verdict’s safety, and dismissed the conviction appeal. It said the sentence appeal was to be listed for fixing a hearing date if it was proceeding.