Judgment: 2016-10-04 · Court archive

Court refuses Perry Wharrie bid to take West Cork cocaine case to Supreme Court

Court of Criminal Appeal ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Perry Wharrie (Applicant)
What

Court refuses Perry Wharrie bid to take West Cork cocaine case to Supreme Court

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Cork Circuit Court
  • West Cork coast
  • Court of Criminal Appeal
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Court therefore held that the proposed question was not a point of law “involved” in its previous decision and was also futile, moot and not shown to be of exceptional public importance. The application for certification was refused.

The Court of Criminal Appeal has refused Perry Wharrie permission to pursue a further Supreme Court appeal arising from his convictions over a major cocaine importation operation off the West Cork coast.

Wharrie had been convicted after a 41-day trial in Cork Circuit Court of possession, possession for sale or supply and possession for sale or supply of drugs worth more than €13,000. The prosecution case was that he was part of an international operation involving cocaine intended to be transferred from the yacht Lucky Day by inflatable boat to the West Cork coast.

The consignment was valued at between €100 million and €440 million. The court noted there was no evidence that the drugs were intended for the Irish market and said the size and international character of the operation pointed in the opposite direction.

Wharrie’s conviction appeal was dismissed in April 2013. His original 30-year sentence was later reduced on appeal, with the Court describing an effective headline term of 22 years and six months and a five-year deduction for mitigation.

He then sought certification of a legal question for an appeal to the Supreme Court. He wanted to argue that offences under sections 15 and 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Act did not apply where drugs were intended for sale or supply outside Ireland.

The Court refused the application. It stressed that this argument had not been raised at Wharrie’s trial. When it later appeared in his conviction appeal, the Court had expressly declined to entertain it under established rules governing new points raised for the first time on appeal.

Although the earlier judgment had also indicated that existing Irish authority would have defeated the argument in any event, those observations were not part of the legal reasoning necessary to decide the appeal.

The Court therefore held that the proposed question was not a point of law “involved” in its previous decision and was also futile, moot and not shown to be of exceptional public importance. The application for certification was refused.

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