Summons valid?

Whoareyou70

Hi all,

I received a summons for possession of a small quantity of illegal substances at a festival last year.

The application was made on 6 August 2020 and I was pulled by the guards at the festival on 2 Aug 2019. The summons is to take place in Dec 2020.

Is this valid even though more than a year passed from the date the guard took my statement to when the summons was issued? It seems strange that it would be dragged out so long

BrianBoru00

Whoareyou70 wrote: »

Hi all,

I received a summons for possession of a small quantity of illegal substances at a festival last year.

The application was made on 6 August 2020 and I was pulled by the guards at the festival on 2 Aug 2019. The summons is to take place in Dec 2020.

Is this valid even though more than a year passed from the date the guard took my statement to when the summons was issued? It seems strange that it would be dragged out so long

Depends on what the summons was for. if it's only for personal use it's six months to create the first summons

Lenar3556

Whoareyou70 wrote: »

Hi all,

I received a summons for possession of a small quantity of illegal substances at a festival last year.

The application was made on 6 August 2020 and I was pulled by the guards at the festival on 2 Aug 2019. The summons is to take place in Dec 2020.

Is this valid even though more than a year passed from the date the guard took my statement to when the summons was issued? It seems strange that it would be dragged out so long

Seek the advise of a solicitor. It is possible that the summons is out of time.

Irishphotodesk

sorry, I have to high horse this one !

you were caught in possession of drugs at a festival and are now (when in receipt of a summons) trying to find a way out of it - why not accept the consequences of your OWN actions and goto court and admit that you chose to be in possession of drugs on the day in question. Be honest and do the right thing, accept the consequences for your own actions.

by all means - goto a solicitor and try to pay your way out of the situation.... if you feel that's the best way to do it.... I would agree having a solicitor is the best way to be when before a court but not being forced to come before a court is even better. (sorry, I had to take the high horse attitude, I really dislike people trying to avoid responsibility for their own actions)

omegaodie

If you do end up in court, tell the judge you refuse to accept the authority of the court, I hear judges love that
p.s especially if you put on a nordie accent

Mod
Pls do not give misleading advice

Horusire

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

sorry, I have to high horse this one !

you were caught in possession of drugs at a festival and are now (when in receipt of a summons) trying to find a way out of it - why not accept the consequences of your OWN actions and goto court and admit that you chose to be in possession of drugs on the day in question. Be honest and do the right thing, accept the consequences for your own actions.

We have checks and balances for a reason. People have gotten off a lot more serious allegations for procedural errors. I would fully support the OP in attempting to get this thrown out.

I have never taken drugs in my life or been in front of the court system however I believe in order to have a fair and impartial system. Checks and balances need to exist.

Halenvaneddie

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

sorry, I have to high horse this one !

you were caught in possession of drugs at a festival and are now (when in receipt of a summons) trying to find a way out of it - why not accept the consequences of your OWN actions and goto court and admit that you chose to be in possession of drugs on the day in question. Be honest and do the right thing, accept the consequences for your own actions.

by all means - goto a solicitor and try to pay your way out of the situation.... if you feel that's the best way to do it.... I would agree having a solicitor is the best way to be when before a court but not being forced to come before a court is even better. (sorry, I had to take the high horse attitude, I really dislike people trying to avoid responsibility for their own actions)

Relax

boogerballs

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

sorry, I have to high horse this one !

you were caught in possession of drugs at a festival and are now (when in receipt of a summons) trying to find a way out of it - why not accept the consequences of your OWN actions and goto court and admit that you chose to be in possession of drugs on the day in question. Be honest and do the right thing, accept the consequences for your own actions.

by all means - goto a solicitor and try to pay your way out of the situation.... if you feel that's the best way to do it.

Wow that didnt take long - If I was the OP I'd tell you where to go with your high-horse. Either answer the question that was asked of keep out of it, no-one asked for your pontificating opinion here.

Re the original question OP, a solicitor is needed here. As far as I am aware given that the summons has been issued it will need to be heard in the court. The best that you could hope for is for a solicitor to argue on the day that the time to issue the summons has expired and ask for it to be struck out.

antfin

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

sorry, I have to high horse this one !

you were caught in possession of drugs at a festival and are now (when in receipt of a summons) trying to find a way out of it - why not accept the consequences of your OWN actions and goto court and admit that you chose to be in possession of drugs on the day in question. Be honest and do the right thing, accept the consequences for your own actions.

by all means - goto a solicitor and try to pay your way out of the situation.... if you feel that's the best way to do it.

That's not how the law works and the criminal justice system has developed procedural rules for very good reasons. Thankfully subjective moral judgement based on personal opinion is not how the courts apply the laws of the land. OP, it's best to engage a solicitor to advise on all criminal prosecutions due to the potentially serious consequences of a criminal conviction on other aspects of your life even if it is unforeseen future consequences.

nuckeythompson

The Garda can extend this due to investigating circumstances. In the above mentioned this might be testing the drugs and this allows them to serve this after 6 months. This is relating to the district court though.
Get a solicitor

Irishphotodesk

Horusire wrote: »

We have checks and balances for a reason. People have gotten off a lot more serious allegations for procedural errors. I would fully support the OP in attempting to get this thrown out.

I have ever taken drugs in my life or been in front of the court system however I believe in order to have a fair and impartial system. Checks and balances need to exist.

I don't disagree with the checks/balances aspect but personal responsibility is needed, the OP in their post admits they were in possession of drugs at a festival (we don't know if this is for sale/supply or personal usage) - but if they know they were in possession of illegal substance(s) when CAUGHT, accept whatever the consequences are when brought before a court.

A solicitor will know how to minimise the sentencing and in some cases allow the person who is guilty of an offence to get off scott free because of .... as you put it checks/balances (clerical/admin errors should be ammendable/accepted in court in my opinion).

do you believe a person - when caught red handed - should not be prosecuted because of an admin error ? (ie. checks/balances done incorrectly) - as an example. a person caught in possession of child porn should be allowed to go free because the warrant was out of date by a day - the facts still remain the same, person caught red handed (in the case I'm thinking of ...it was a judge who was then allowed to retire afterwards, its a case which sticks with me)

Halenvaneddie

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I don't disagree with the checks/balances aspect but personal responsibility is needed, the OP in their post admits they were in possession of drugs at a festival (we don't know if this is for sale/supply or personal usage) - but if they know they were in possession of illegal substance(s) when CAUGHT, accept whatever the consequences are when brought before a court.

A solicitor will know how to minimise the sentencing and in some cases allow the person who is guilty of an offence to get off scott free because of .... as you put it checks/balances (clerical/admin errors should be ammendable/accepted in court in my opinion).

do you believe a person - when caught red handed - should not be prosecuted because of an admin error ? (ie. checks/balances done incorrectly) - as an example. a person caught in possession of child porn should be allowed to go free because the warrant was out of date by a day - the facts still remain the same, person caught red handed (in the case I'm thinking of ...it was a judge who was then allowed to retire afterwards, its a case which sticks with me)

Bit of a stretch in fairness

Sierra Oscar

There is a long backlog in the Courts Service issuing summonses currently due to Covid-19.

The six month restriction is on Gardaí initiating proceedings. It's likely in this case that the Garda initiated proceedings within six months, the summons was sent to the Courts Service and there was a delay in the Courts Service issuing the summons. I'm fairly certain the summons is still valid (if it's not then the Courts Service will likely have to throw out tens of thousands of summonses), but as always it's best to seek the advice of a solicitor.

You say the application was made in August 2020, do you mean it was served on you on this date?

Irishphotodesk

boogerballs wrote: »

Wow that didnt take long - If I was the OP I'd tell you where to go with your high-horse. Either answer the question that was asked of keep out of it, no-one asked for your pontificating opinion here.

Re the original question OP, a solicitor is needed here. As far as I am aware given that the summons has been issued it will need to be heard in the court. The best that you could hope for is for a solicitor to argue on the day that the time to issue the summons has expired and ask for it to be struck out.

interesting that you tell me to answer the question or keep out of it yet - you don't answer the question either - the question cannot be answered without more input from the OP.

We are unaware of if the "small" amount of drugs is personal usage - its subjective (the OP could have had hundreds or thousands of euro worth of drugs in their possession) , if the OP was charged with sale/supply or simple possession.

I have given two opinions - one being to accept the consequences of their own actions and also to seek a solicitor.

The only solid advise that can be given to the OP is talk to a solicitor - which should have been done BEFORE giving a statement to gardai, but now that summons has appeared, they NEED to goto a solicitor and pay a solicitor to see if the solicitor can get them off the hook.

Irishphotodesk

Halenvaneddie wrote: »

Bit of a stretch in fairness

what is a stretch ? do you disagree that both situations the "defendant" was in possession at the time of the alleged offences ?

have a google for judge, child porn possession and you will find the case .... if you get stuck add kerry.

Glurrl

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

what is a stretch ? have a google for judge, child porn possession and you will find the case .... if you get stuck add kerry.

The op wasnt caught with cp

rapul

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

what is a stretch ? do you disagree that both situations the "defendant" was in possession at the time of the alleged offences ?

have a google for judge, child porn possession and you will find the case .... if you get stuck add kerry.

Shouldn't be telling people to look that up

Irishphotodesk

antfin wrote: »

That's not how the law works and the criminal justice system has developed procedural rules for very good reasons. Thankfully subjective moral judgement based on personal opinion is not how the courts apply the laws of the land. OP, it's best to engage a solicitor to advise on all criminal prosecutions due to the potentially serious consequences of a criminal conviction on other aspects of your life even if it is unforeseen future consequences.

I can't disagree with you - the courts cannot work based on the moral judgement from a random person on the internet is just as much as it can't work based on random people seeking legal opinion on an internet forum.

as has been mentioned OP - go seek advice of a solicitor - pay for it and seek one with experience in criminal law (you should be able to find the names of some of the regulars by googling stories) - given the dates involved, you may be before a judge who has little time/patience for possession of drugs cases and who is relatively strict/hard on law.

Irishphotodesk

Glurrl wrote: »

The op wasnt caught with cp

but was caught in possession of drugs by their own admission....which if they admitted the same in a statement they might have a hard time avoiding a conviction.

did you read the context of my post - it was said as an example of admin/clerical errors which the OP is hoping is also available as an option in their defence.

HBC08

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

what is a stretch ? do you disagree that both situations the "defendant" was in possession at the time of the alleged offences ?

have a google for judge, child porn possession and you will find the case .... if you get stuck add kerry.

OP says small amount ,you say that could be hundreds of thousands worth of drugs.
That's a stretch to put it mildly.

Irishphotodesk

rapul wrote: »

Shouldn't be telling people to look that up

for what reason ? it was an example of how a clerical/admin (or check/balances) error can lead to no conviction, which is essentially the type of case law that is required to back up the OP if he/she has difficulty with a judge who doesn't want to accept that the procedures are there for a reason.

its of benefit to the OP ...isnt it ?

Irishphotodesk

HBC08 wrote: »

OP says small amount ,you say that could be hundreds of thousands worth of drugs.
That's a stretch to put it mildly.

again - we can only discuss what the OP has given us - we cannot know what is a small amount to the OP could be huge to others.

as has been mentioned - The OP need to goto a solicitor and needs a solicitor with experience in criminal law.

For simple posession its a simple enough system

6 months from the time you were stopped / searched to APPLY for the summons. The time it takes to analysis the dugs doesnt delay the application as you dont need that until the hearing.

The ISSUE date and the actual court date are in the hands of the courts and not subject to a strict time limit.

eddiervp20

So have you ever broken the law in your life Irishphotodesk?Broke the speed limit or anything of the sort? I trust if you have that you have gone into the Garda station and reported yourself?
Or is your opinion only to people who have been caught,High horse my hole.

Samuel T. Cogley

OP seek the advice of a good solicitor. They will use any defects in the summons to your advantage but also show the court you are taking the matter seriously. A conviction for even minor possession could have significant ramifications.

HBC08

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

again - we can only discuss what the OP has given us - we cannot know what is a small amount to the OP could be huge to others.

as has been mentioned - The OP need to goto a solicitor and needs a solicitor with experience in criminal law.

Based in what the OP has told us he was caught with a small amount of drugs,that means different things to different people maybe it an 1/8 of weed maybe it's a 9 bar of hash,in no way can it be hundreds of thousands worth of drugs.
That is more than a stretch which is what you asked.

Agreed they should go to a solicitor.

Irishphotodesk

HBC08 wrote: »

Based in what the OP has told us he was caught with a small amount of drugs,that means different things to different people maybe it an 1/8 of weed maybe it's a 9 bar of hash,in no way can it be hundreds of thousands worth of drugs.
That is more than a stretch which is what you asked.

Agreed they should go to a solicitor.

i have no idea what the value is for either of those !

To be honest I couldn't tell you the difference between weed/hash either, as I've previously said the OPs version of small might be different to yours or mine, we do not know if the OP had enough to supply or personal usage nor do we know at what stage in the festival the OP was caught.

most festivals are 2/3/4 days long - if the OP was caught on day1 they could have had a substantial amount on them which was for personal usage but intended to last ALL weekend, if they were caught on day 3 of 3 its likely they had quite a little bit left....we do not know if the OP brought along enough to share with others if the occasion allowed....either way the ONLY ADVICE the OP should be given is goto a solicitor with experience in criminal law.

DesperateDan

If we're comparing drugs to cp offences let's compare littering with serial killing as well

Halenvaneddie

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

what is a stretch ? do you disagree that both situations the "defendant" was in possession at the time of the alleged offences ?

have a google for judge, child porn possession and you will find the case .... if you get stuck add kerry.

They are hardly the same thing , that’s my point
Being caught with a few whatever and being found in possession of cp is apples and oranges

IAMAMORON

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

sorry, I have to high horse this one !

you were caught in possession of drugs at a festival and are now (when in receipt of a summons) trying to find a way out of it - why not accept the consequences of your OWN actions and goto court and admit that you chose to be in possession of drugs on the day in question. Be honest and do the right thing, accept the consequences for your own actions.

by all means - goto a solicitor and try to pay your way out of the situation.... if you feel that's the best way to do it.... I would agree having a solicitor is the best way to be when before a court but not being forced to come before a court is even better. (sorry, I had to take the high horse attitude, I really dislike people trying to avoid responsibility for their own actions)

For this reason alone I hope it gets thrown out.

A bit of personal at a festival a year ago.... get a grip.

Samuel T. Cogley

Halenvaneddie wrote: »

They are hardly the same thing , that’s my point
Being caught with a few whatever and being found in possession of cp is apples and oranges

A few years ago - wrongly of course - there was a school of thought that that simple possession of child abuse material was a victimless crime. I do hope people cop on in a similar vein that simple drug possession is not a victimless crime either.

Although I do also hope that legalisation isn't too far off. (For the avoidance of doubt of drugs)

Whoareyou70

Thanks everyone for their opinions.

It was a small amount (€50) for personal usage.

I've contacted a solicitor for further advice but was also interested on what other people had to say on the matter.

It would be a shame if there was lasting consequences in what I see as a harmless offence but this is the system we are apart of I guess.

Irishphotodesk

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I don't disagree with the checks/balances aspect but personal responsibility is needed, the OP in their post admits they were in possession of drugs at a festival (we don't know if this is for sale/supply or personal usage) - but if they know they were in possession of illegal substance(s) when CAUGHT, accept whatever the consequences are when brought before a court.

A solicitor will know how to minimise the sentencing and in some cases allow the person who is guilty of an offence to get off scott free because of .... as you put it checks/balances (clerical/admin errors should be ammendable/accepted in court in my opinion).

do you believe a person - when caught red handed - should not be prosecuted because of an admin error ? (ie. checks/balances done incorrectly) - as an example. a person caught in possession of child porn should be allowed to go free because the warrant was out of date by a day - the facts still remain the same, person caught red handed (in the case I'm thinking of ...it was a judge who was then allowed to retire afterwards, its a case which sticks with me)

A delay in prosecution is unfair on the accused too though, as they are left to stew while waiting the outcome of the case.

It's funny you use the example of child porn. Iirc several years ago the State discontinued cases of possession of child porn against a number of accused as the State didn't have the resources at the time to investigate the cases fully. (I believe the Gardaí who would have usually worked in the area were moved across to investigate financial wrong-doing). Hard one to balance but I know (locally, not professionally) of one of the accused and the accusation, which was never fully tried in Court, still hangs over him.

Wailin

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I have given two opinions.

I think it would be best you keep your opinions to yourself in future.


Mod
This forum is for legal discussion

Irishphotodesk

Whoareyou70 wrote: »

Thanks everyone for their opinions.

It was a small amount (€50) for personal usage.

I've contacted a solicitor for further advice but was also interested on what other people had to say on the matter.

It would be a shame if there was lasting consequences in what I see as a harmless offence but this is the system we are apart of I guess.

If a solicitor can be caught in possession of drugs going into a prison and continue to practice you should be given probation act (assuming first offence).

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

A delay in prosecution is unfair on the accused too though, as they are left to stew while waiting the outcome of the case.

It's funny you use the example of child porn. Iirc several years ago the State discontinued cases of possession of child porn against a number of accused as the State didn't have the resources at the time to investigate the cases fully. (I believe the Gardaí who would have usually worked in the area were moved across to investigate financial wrong-doing). Hard one to balance but I know (locally, not professionally) of one of the accused and the accusation, which was never fully tried in Court, still hangs over him.

werent the cases dismissed on request from the defence as opposed to a nolle prosequi?

Claw Hammer

Possession of drugs is an either way offence capable of being prosecuted summarily or on indictment. For this reason there is no time limit for the issue of a summons. Whatever defence the o/p might have, delay in the application for a summons is not going to work.

Claw Hammer

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Possession of drugs is an either way offence capable of being prosecuted summarily or on indictment. For this reason there is no time limit for the issue of a summons. Whatever defence the o/p might have, delay in the application for a summons is not going to work.

This is incorrect. Summons for section 3 personal use is 6 months. Section 15 offences on summons is 12 months as its a hybrid offence. No limit on indictment only which this isnt.

Claw Hammer

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

This is incorrect. Summons for section 3 personal use is 6 months. Section 15 offences on summons is 12 months as its a hybrid offence. No limit on indictment only which this isnt.

Section 27 of the misuse of drugs act allows from trial on indictment for Section 3.
Under Section 177 of the courts of justice act 2006 the 6 month limit does not apply even if the trial is suummary.

grogi

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

what is a stretch ? do you disagree that both situations the "defendant" was in possession at the time of the alleged offences ?

have a google for judge, child porn possession and you will find the case .... if you get stuck add kerry.

I strongly believe that the law enforcement should follow the law and if the case comes with such gravity, it should be spotless and admin errors free. The procedures are there for good reasons and should not be dismissed because it is more convenient.

Claw Hammer

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Section 27 of the misuse of drugs act allows from trial on indictment for Section 3.
Under Section 177 of the courts of justice act 2006 the 6 month limit does not apply even if the trial is suummary.

You sir, have blown my mind. I need to check this further.

Claw Hammer

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I need to check this further.

You sure do!

nuac

Mod
This discussion is becoming heated. Also forum rules discourage discussion re small amounts of drugs. Therefore closing this discussion.