The Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed Alphonsus Connolly’s appeal against his conviction for possessing amphetamine for supply where the market value was alleged to be at least €13,000. The court treated his application for leave to appeal as the appeal itself and found no error in the trial judge’s decision to leave the case to the jury.
Connolly was convicted on one count relating to 16 November 2004 at Kill West, Kill, Co. Kildare. He had pleaded guilty to a separate count of possessing amphetamine for supply on the same date and at the same place. His appeal challenged only the count carrying the market-value threshold.
The prosecution evidence was that Connolly had a red shopping bag containing ten sealed clear plastic bags of white powder, weighing 9.717kg in total. Forensic scientist Dr Mary Casey tested five bags; each contained amphetamine. She said she was 99% confident at least seven of the ten contained amphetamine, and that it was highly unlikely any would test negative based on their appearance and contents. No quantitative analysis established the proportion of amphetamine in the powder.
Casey said amphetamine purities generally fell between 10% and 40%. She accepted that the tests could detect amphetamine at a 1% level, but rejected the suggestion that the content could range from 1% to 99%. The court noted that her qualifications and the basis for her opinion had not been challenged at trial.
A detective sergeant valued the total powder at €145,755, assuming it contained 10% amphetamine. He accepted that five tested bags at 1% content would be worth €7,287.75, below the threshold, and that value would fall if the drug quantity were lower. The appellant argued that the evidence could not establish the required value without quantitative testing.
The court held that the jury could reasonably accept Casey’s evidence and find, without speculation, that the powder contained at least 10% amphetamine. It also held that the evidence allowed the jury to conclude that the contents of all ten bags were the same. The court said section 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977 did not require proof of a specific minimum percentage of the drug.
It concluded that sufficient evidence could support a finding beyond reasonable doubt that the market value exceeded €13,000. The appeal was dismissed; the judgment did not alter the conviction.