The High Court has quashed three convictions imposed at Letterkenny District Court after finding that it lacked jurisdiction to try charges that had already been initiated in Dublin. The charges are to return to the Dublin Metropolitan District Court to be heard and determined according to law.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice McDermott on 7 November 2014, concerned James O’Malley’s judicial review challenge to convictions entered on 15 September 2014. He had pleaded guilty to 33 offences at Letterkenny, including 30 relating to Donegal, two relating to Dublin and one relating to Newbridge, County Kildare.
The three challenged charges arose from an alleged assault in Dublin on 20 April 2013, an alleged public order offence at the Museum Luas Stop on 24 May 2013, and an allegation that O’Malley gave a false or misleading name and address to a garda in Newbridge on 20 December 2013. The High Court said the Dublin and Newbridge proceedings had first been initiated in Dublin. O’Malley was living in Dublin when those offences occurred, but was living in Donegal when he was arrested and convicted.
At Letterkenny, O’Malley’s solicitor told the court that he consented to all 33 charges being dealt with there. The prosecution indicated it was willing to proceed only on the Donegal charges and have the Dublin charges remanded to Dublin. The judgment records that O’Malley wanted the Dublin charges heard in Donegal, citing a threat to his life connected to a drug debt. The District Judge accepted jurisdiction and imposed concurrent prison terms for the three charges.
The High Court held that a charge must be heard in the District Court area where it was properly initiated. It found no general statutory power to transfer the proceedings to another district because the accused later moved there. It also rejected the challenge to the warrant based on the inclusion of O’Malley’s Dublin address.
Although the judge described the application as lacking merit and noted O’Malley’s earlier consent and guilty pleas, he concluded that the jurisdictional defect was fundamental. One of the challenged sentences was being served, and the orders were void from the outset. The court therefore declined to refuse relief as a matter of discretion and quashed the three convictions and sentences. It remitted the matters to the Dublin Metropolitan District Court; the judgment did not determine the charges there.