The Court of Appeal has dismissed Gavin Sheehan’s appeal against four convictions arising from a shooting in Cork in May 2016, affirming the convictions despite finding that the trial judge erred by refusing to let Sheehan’s lawyers withdraw.
The court said that error had no impact on the trial and did not cause a miscarriage of justice. It rejected the other grounds of appeal, including challenges concerning pre-trial publicity, the jury, mobile-phone messages, CCTV evidence and the trial judge’s directions.
Sheehan was convicted on 28 November 2016 of possessing a firearm and ammunition, unlawfully discharging a firearm, and assault causing serious harm. Before trial, he had pleaded guilty to two criminal-damage counts. He was sentenced in February 2017 to concurrent terms, including 14 years with the final three suspended on each possession count, seven years for unlawful discharge, and 12 years with the final two suspended for the assault.
The charges followed events in the Laurel Ridge and Hollywood Estate area of Shanakiel on the night of 14–15 May 2016. Ciara Sheehan was shot in the neck at a house in Hollywood Estate and received medical treatment at Cork University Hospital. The court said a pistol was later recovered near a wall between the estates. The bullet removed from her neck had class characteristics comparable to that pistol; the court did not say the bullet had been conclusively matched to it.
The appeal court ruled that the trial judge should have directly asked Sheehan whether he wished to dismiss his lawyers and defend himself. It said he should also have been told that dismissing them would not, by itself, entitle him to an adjournment, and given time to consider. However, the court found no suggestion that the defence was conducted incompetently, that Sheehan’s instructions were not followed, or that communication broke down. It applied the statutory proviso allowing a conviction to stand where no miscarriage of justice actually occurred.
The court rejected Sheehan’s challenge to the admission of Facebook Messenger material recovered from a phone found in his car. It held that the contents were visible text and that the computer-evidence rule relied on by the defence did not apply. It also upheld the admission of CCTV evidence and the trial judge’s decision to allow the jury to consider the prosecution case.
The judges rejected arguments that publicity, graffiti outside the courthouse and a person shouting “Rat” in court made a fair trial impossible. They also rejected challenges to the jury directions and the verdicts. The appeal against conviction was dismissed.