The Court of Appeal dismissed Damien McCabe’s cross appeal against a High Court judgment concerning his detention from 28 May 2014. The appeal challenged both the meaning of “convicted of an offence” in section 99(9) of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 and the validity of the warrant issued after a suspended sentence was revoked.
McCabe argued that, in summary proceedings, a person could not be treated as convicted for the purposes of section 99(9) before sentence was imposed. He also argued that the warrant did not state enough about the later offence or the bond associated with his suspended sentence to justify his detention.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the High Court that conviction and sentence can be treated separately under section 99(9). The provision requires a person convicted of an offence during the suspension period to be referred, before sentence for that offence, to the court that imposed the suspended sentence. That court can then decide whether to activate all, part or none of the suspended term. The court said this process could not operate as intended if conviction always had to include a sentence.
The warrant stated that McCabe had received a six-month sentence, suspended for two years on condition that he keep the peace and be of good behaviour; that he was convicted in the District Court on 26 May 2014; and that the Circuit Court revoked the suspension the following day and ordered him to serve the full six months. It also remanded him in custody to appear before the District Court on 28 May for sentence on the later offence.
The Court of Appeal held that the warrant clearly set out the jurisdiction exercised at each stage and the reasons for McCabe’s detention. It said the warrant did not need to recite every item of proof that would have supported the earlier court orders. The absence of a reference on its face to the bond, or to proof that the later offence occurred during the suspension period, did not make it invalid.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Alan Mahon on 22 July 2015, dismissed McCabe’s cross appeal from the High Court judgment of 3 June 2014. It concerned two of his challenges to detention; a separate judgment addressed a third challenge. The Court of Appeal also stated that it agreed with the proposed orders on the appeal and cross appeal in a separate judgment. This judgment does not set out those orders in full.