Judge dismisses charge in Carlow District Court of possession of drugs for sale or supply
Judge Geraldine Carthy
A CARLOW District Court judge dismissed a charge of possession of drugs for sale or supply against a young Carlow man after finding that the evidence did not support the more serious allegation, convicting him instead on the lesser charge of possession.
Daniel Hayden of 118 New Oak Estate, Carlow appeared before Judge Geraldine Carthy charged with possession of cocaine for sale or supply and possession for personal use, following a garda search of his bedroom in September 2025.
Detective Garda John Moulton told the court that on 28 September 2025 at approximately 6.50pm, he entered New Oak Estate in Carlow town to execute a search warrant. En route to the defendant’s address, he observed three people, including Mr Hayden, seated in a parked vehicle in the estate. Gda Moulton said he approached the vehicle, introduced himself and noted that the occupants appeared “excessively nervous.” The vehicle was searched under section 26 of the Misuse of Drugs Act and Mr Hayden (24) was conveyed to Carlow Garda Station where a search of his person revealed nothing.
Gda Moulton then returned to the address in New Oak Estate where he was admitted by a relative of the defendant. In a bedroom identified as Mr Hayden’s, he found a set of digital scales. Inside the wardrobe, a knotted sock was discovered which was found to contain a number of bags of cocaine. Mr Hayden was subsequently arrested.
The detective told the court the seizure was initially estimated to be worth approximately €1,000, a figure later revised to €882. The cocaine, initially recorded at 14 grams, was also subsequently adjusted to 12.6 grams.
“My opinion was that the quantity of cocaine and the scales were not consistent with personal use,” Grda Moulton told the court, explaining why he had detained Mr Hayden on suspicion of sale and supply.
In interview, Mr Hayden admitted ownership of the cocaine but maintained it was for personal use. When questioned about whether 12.6 grams was excessive for this purpose, he replied that he “could use four grams on a night out.” When asked if he believed he had a cocaine problem, he said he did not and said he could not recall where he had obtained the drugs.
Mr Hayden’s mobile phone was seized and he voluntarily provided the PIN code to gardaí. When the garda put it to him that the quantity was “too much for personal use,” Mr Hayden replied: “That’s your own opinion.” Cross examining Gda Moulton, solicitor Joe Farrell asked whether any evidence of drug dealing had been found on his client’s phone. The garda confirmed there had not.
Mr Farrell challenged the decision to bring his client to the station rather than have him show gardaí the room directly, asking: “Was it done on purpose?” Gda Moulton replied that it was his opinion that it had been necessary to return to the scene as quickly as possible.
On the question of the defendant’s demeanour, Mr Farrell said: “Most young lads would be nervous meeting the guards, would you accept that?” Grda Moulton replied: “Yes, but it was based on more than that.” Mr Farrell pressed further, arguing that, based on his client’s claimed usage, the cocaine found would amount to roughly three nights out and that “not everyone found with scales and drugs is prosecuted for sale and supply.” Gda Moulton maintained that the packaging of the cocaine had been a significant factor in the assessment, telling the court: “There were five different deals or bags of drugs and scales. Someone addicted to drugs doesn’t weigh them before they take them.” Mr Farrell concluded by telling the court that his client had co-operated fully with the investigation, voluntarily handing over his phone and PIN, and that no evidence of dealing had been found on the device.
Judge Carthy said she found herself in agreement with the defence. “I have to agree with Mr Farrell,” she said, dismissing the section 15 charge of possession for sale and supply and convicting Mr Hayden on the section 3 charge of possession.
Mr Hayden has no previous convictions.
Addressing the court, Mr Farrell said: “It’s the second set of justice he’s received in this court. His parents, who are with him today, are far from impressed they’ve been brought up the steps of this court.” Judge Carthy directed that a probation report be prepared within six weeks. She indicated that a range of penalties remained open to the court, including a custodial sentence, but added: “I wouldn’t do that before he has had the opportunity to engage with probation services.” The matter was adjourned for a probation report.
