The Supreme Court held yesterday that a peace commissioner's signature on a search warrant was not sufficient to establish the warrant's validity.
The court agreed that Judge Joseph Mathews was correct when he directed a jury to find a man not guilty of assault and robbery in November 1997 at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court.
Delivering the court's judgment, Mr Justice Barrington said the validity of the warrant was challenged at the start of the trial of Mr David Owens, who was arrested at Doon Court, Poppintree, Dublin on November 9th, 1994.
A garda, acting on confidential information that the proceeds of a robbery might be found at Doon Court, had secured a warrant from a peace commissioner to search the premises.
The door was opened by Mr Owens. Nothing incriminating was found.
The garda however, on the basis of confidential information and statements in his possession, believed Mr Owens was responsible for the robbery and arrested him.
When Mr Owens appeared before the Circuit Criminal Court Judge Mathews agreed to try a preliminary issue relating to the validity of the search warrant in the absence of the jury.
Mr Justice Barrington said the prosecution's problem was that the peace commissioner was 85 at the time, and was too ill to come to court to explain his state of mind at the time he issued the warrant.
In those circumstances Judge Mathews felt bound by a 1989 Supreme Court decision and held the peace commissioner's signature was not enough to establish the warrant's validity.
Judge Mathews also held that the peace commissioner had to be present in person to explain his state of mind and be available for cross-examination.
Judge Mathews had ruled there was no evidence to establish the warrant's validity and directed the jury to find the accused not guilty.
Mr Justice Barrington said a search warrant was a document which might affect constitutional rights and a peace commissioner was a public officer but not a court of record.
He agreed with Judge Mathews's findings.