Judgment: 2016-07-04 · Court archive

Court of Appeal dismisses challenge to jury selection in conspiracy conviction

The court ruled that a trial judge was entitled to exclude jurors from three Dublin areas after hearing reasons for the request and the defence objection.

The Court of Appeal ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Joseph Warren (Appellant)
What

The court ruled that a trial judge was entitled to exclude jurors from three Dublin areas after hearing reasons for the request and the defence objection.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Celbridge
  • Ballymun
  • Finglas
  • Cabra
  • Dublin
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 2 November 2007; 7 November 2012

    Warren was convicted by a jury at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court on 7 November 2012 and sentenced to eight years in prison. The conspiracy count arose from an attempted theft of cash from a cash-in-transit vehicle in Celbridge, Co. Kildare, on 2 November 2007. Gardaí intervened during the attempt and arrested Warren and others at or near the shopping centre. At trial, Warren maintained that he had been involved under duress; the prosecution disputed that account.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Court of Appeal held that a judge may hear objections based on a common cause and decide whether to exclude a group of panel members, provided reasons are given and the objections are heard. It said individual challenges could have been used, but the judge’s approach was within her discretion in the circumstances, including the expected length and complexity of the trial.

The Court of Appeal has dismissed Joseph Warren’s appeal against his conviction for conspiracy, rejecting his challenge to the exclusion of potential jurors resident in Ballymun, Finglas and Cabra.

Warren was convicted by a jury at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court on 7 November 2012 and sentenced to eight years in prison. The conspiracy count arose from an attempted theft of cash from a cash-in-transit vehicle in Celbridge, Co. Kildare, on 2 November 2007. Gardaí intervened during the attempt and arrested Warren and others at or near the shopping centre. At trial, Warren maintained that he had been involved under duress; the prosecution disputed that account.

The appeal focused on jury selection. The prosecution asked the trial judge to exclude residents of the three areas, submitting that Warren, co-accused and a deceased man connected with the case had strong associations there, and that local knowledge could affect impartiality. The prosecution also referred to an earlier trial, when a juror realised after being selected that he knew Warren. The defence objected, arguing that excluding an entire section of the community was improper and that the statutory challenge process and judicial warnings were sufficient.

The judge granted the request and told the panel that anyone connected with the case, or living in the named areas, should not serve. A jury was selected under that direction. Warren’s appeal argued that the judge had acted wrongly by excluding residents as a group rather than considering potential jurors individually.

The Court of Appeal held that a judge may hear objections based on a common cause and decide whether to exclude a group of panel members, provided reasons are given and the objections are heard. It said individual challenges could have been used, but the judge’s approach was within her discretion in the circumstances, including the expected length and complexity of the trial.

The court concluded that the remaining areas of Dublin could provide a reasonably representative jury. It dismissed the appeal, leaving Warren’s conviction and sentence undisturbed. The judgment was delivered on 4 July 2016.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review