User:MULAWSTUDENT10/sandbox

DPP v Daniels, [2014] IESC 64; [2014] 2 IR 813, was a Irish Supreme Court case in which the Court held that were a sentence is proportionate to the offence and to the circumstances of the offender then the existence of mitigating factors will not infer that, when a maximum sentence is imposed, there is an element of preventative detention involved.

(It is easiest to edit using the 'visual editor' rather than editing the source of the article. If you are not sure how to set your preferences please review the tutorial video on Moodle).

(You do not have to add the table of contents; Wikipedia does this automatically.)

Infobox, located at the right of the article in its own box (this is 'sub-heading 1')
Every Irish Supreme Court case should use the infobox court case template. This can be the last part to add to your article. When you are in edit mode you can click on the infobox and select edit or you can use "edit source" to add information. If you have any trouble with the infobox post a message on the Moodle discussion forum asking for help.

What belongs here:
Central Criminal Court

In this case Mr. Daniels attempted to murder a ten year old girl "to see what it was like" He pleaded guilty to attempted murder on the third day of his trial in the Central Criminal Court (CCC) and a discretionary sentence of life imprisonment was imposed on him by Carney J.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Mr. Daniels appealed to the Criminal Court of Appeal (CCA) on two grounds, the first being that the imposition of a life sentence by the trial judge gave no weight to the mitigating factors put forward on his behalf and the second being that the sentence imposed amounted to a sentence of preventative detention. The CCA refused leave to appeal but they did certify that their decision included two points of law of exceptional public importance, the first being "is it lawful to give an accused person the maximum term of imprisonment for the offence with which he is charged under statute even when there are significant mitigating factors such as: 1. (a) a plea, 2. (b) a first offence, 3. (c) age?" and the second being "does the sentence imposed constitute a sentence of preventative detention and if so is such a sentence a proper one in Irish law". This was done after an application was made under s. 29 of the Courts of Justice Act 1924 (as substituted by s. 22 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006) which meant that the case would be referred to the supreme court to deliberate on the two points of law.

This section includes facts of the dispute, its history in lower courts, and relevant historical/political context. Subsections may include history, facts of the case, procedural history or lower courts (or even a subsection for each lower court, appropriately titled), and petition (for certiorari). You can cite the judgement when you are summarizing the facts of the case.

Oral arguments can go at the end of this section if you choose the "Opinion of the Court" style (see full explanation below).

Holding of the Supreme Court
This section should contain a summary of the Court's opinion as well as any important events of note that occurred during the case. Use this section for excerpts from the decision and precedents cited.

Subsections or a paragraph for concurring and dissenting opinions can also be added as appropriate. Should be in the form of "Concurrences" and "Dissents" for section headers.

Subsequent developments
This is an optional section. Whether your article has it or not depends on the sources you find on Westlaw IE.Cases that clarify/reverse; relevant developments for the parties or dispute (outcome of remand/"Nixon turned over his tapes..."), social effects. Be sure to include citations in support of any claim you make here about the case's subsequent impact.

Refer forward to subsequent cases citing this decision as precedent.

Infobox, located at the right of the article in its own box (this is 'sub-heading 1')
Every Irish Supreme Court case should use the infobox court case template. This can be the last part to add to your article. When you are in edit mode you can click on the infobox and select edit or you can use "edit source" to add information. If you have any trouble with the infobox post a message on the Moodle discussion forum asking for help.

What belongs here:
This section includes facts of the dispute, its history in lower courts, and relevant historical/political context. Subsections may include history, facts of the case, procedural history or lower courts (or even a subsection for each lower court, appropriately titled), and petition (for certiorari). You can cite the judgement when you are summarizing the facts of the case.

Oral arguments can go at the end of this section if you choose the "Opinion of the Court" style (see full explanation below).

Holding of the Supreme Court
This section should contain a summary of the Court's opinion as well as any important events of note that occurred during the case. Use this section for excerpts from the decision and precedents cited.

Subsections or a paragraph for concurring and dissenting opinions can also be added as appropriate. Should be in the form of "Concurrences" and "Dissents" for section headers.

Subsequent developments
This is an optional section. Whether your article has it or not depends on the sources you find on Westlaw IE.Cases that clarify/reverse; relevant developments for the parties or dispute (outcome of remand/"Nixon turned over his tapes..."), social effects. Be sure to include citations in support of any claim you make here about the case's subsequent impact.

Refer forward to subsequent cases citing this decision as precedent.