Queen v Daniel Raymond Dunlop
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | McCloskey LJ |
| Judgment Date | 06 December 2019 |
| Neutral Citation | [2019] NICA 72 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 06 December 2019 |
1
Neutral Citation No: [2019] NICA 72
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: McC11123
Delivered: 06/12/2019
IN HER MAJESTY’S COURT OF APPEAL IN NORTHERN IRELAND
________
THE QUEEN
-v-
DANIEL RAYMOND DUNLOP
________
Before: Morgan LCJ, McCloskey LJ and Huddleston J
Mr R McConkey BL (McConnell Kelly and Company Solicitors) for the Appellant
Mr R Steer BL (Public Prosecution Service) for the Prosecution
________
McCloskey LJ (delivering the judgment of the court)
Preface
Further to the ex tempore decision of the court pronounced on 06 December 2019 this
judgment contains our more detailed reasons.
Introduction
[1] This appeal against sentence is brought with the leave of the single judge.
The Appellant received a custodial sentence of 20 months, divided equally between
imprisonment and licenced release, in respect of the following offences:
a) Count 1: supply of a Class A drug (cocaine) contrary to section 4(3)(b) of the
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
b) Count 2: supply of a Class B drug (cannabis) contrary to section 4(3)(b) of
the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
2
Trial History
[2] The offending occurred on 30 October 2015. On 22 January 2019 the Appellant
was committed for trial in the Crown Court. Upon arraignment on 4 March 2019 he
pleaded not guilty to both counts. At his re-arraignment on 16 May 2019 the
Appellant pleaded guilty to both counts. His plea of guilty was made on
re-arraignment. On 27 September 2019 he was sentenced in the terms already
indicated. Notice of Appeal was lodged on 24th October 2019. The decision and
Order of the single judge are dated 14 November 2019.
The Offending
[3] On 30 October 2015 police officers conducted a planned stop and search of a
vehicle proceeding from the Stena Cairnryan ferry. The Appellant was one of three
occupants. A postage receipt was found. The police intercepted the items posted and
seized two packages; one containing 117.08 grams of cocaine at 8% purity and the
other containing 966 grams of cannabis. All three persons were prosecuted.
Previous Convictions
[4] The Appellant has a substantial criminal record, comprising 61 previous
convictions, three of which relate to possession of drugs (cannabis). Some analysis of
his previous offending is appropriate. His 63 previous convictions, which date from
the age of 16, include three drugs offences committed between 2004 and 2008. These
entailed two offences of possession of a Class C controlled drug and one of
possessing a Class B controlled drug. These offences were penalised by modest fines
and destruction/forfeiture measures. Road traffic offences form the largest group in
the criminal record. All of the Appellant’s previous offences were prosecuted
summarily, with the signal exception of robbery and thefts (in July 2012) which were
punished by a determinate custodial sentence entailing two years and three months
imprisonment, coupled with a licensed release period of two years and nine months.
The two index offences were committed during the licence period, some three years
before the self-referral noted below.
The Appellant
[5] From the pre–sentence report one learns that the Appellant -
(a) Is unemployed and is in receipt of benefits.
(b) Lives with his partner and their young daughter.
(c) Asserts that he is no longer a drug user; No longer misuses drugs and
alcohol; references provided to the court confirm his desire for positive
change.
To continue reading
Request your trial
11 cases
-
Queen v Gerald O'Hara
...several sentences of 18 months imprisonment (the statutory maximum being 24 months) for these particular offences. [13] In R v Dunlop [2019] NICA 72 this court, having reviewed the relevant leading jurisprudence, rehearsed at [29] what it described as the “most important general principles ......
-
Summary of Judgment - In re JKL (Aaron Sterritt - Talk Talk)
...HM Advocate (No 2) [2013] UKSC 36, together with the recent review of the leading authorities in the decision of this court in R v Dunlop [2019] NICA 72 at [25] – [26]. Judicial Communications Office 6 multiple distinctions between the situation of a person (merely) suspected of an offence ......
-
Sterritt (Aaron's) Application
...HM Advocate (No 2) [2013] UKSC 36, together with the recent review of the leading authorities in the decision of this court in R v Dunlop [2019] NICA 72 at [25] – [26]. In the present case, while the information available is not particularly detailed, we are disposed to accept the agreement......
-
Director of Public Prosecution's Reference (Number 5 of 2019) - Harrington Legen Jack
...Boolell v State of Mauritius [2006] UKPC 46 and Rummun v Mauritius [2013] UKPC 6. In giving the judgment of this court in R v Dunlop [2019] NICA 72 at paragraph [29] McCloskey LJ stated that the “most important general principles to be distilled from the binding decisions of the House of Lo......
Request a trial to view additional results