Dean Moore's suspension extended after successful DPP leniency review
This report is a localnews.ie summary based on public court reporting and records; sources are listed below.
The Court of Appeal allowed the Director of Public Prosecutions' undue-leniency review of Dean Moore's sentences on 14 March 2017. Mr. Justice Mahon delivered the judgment, which found the original sentences unduly lenient.
Moore pleaded guilty to robbery and assault causing harm.
Dublin Circuit Criminal Court sentenced him on 12 February 2016 to three years and six months for robbery and two years and six months for assault causing harm. Both sentences were already fully suspended for three years, with one year's Probation Service supervision.
The original conditions required compliance with probation directions and appointments, offending-behaviour work including victim awareness, and engagement with community addiction support. Gambling-addiction therapy and other services were required if deemed necessary by the Probation Service. The court also directed that €900 Moore had made available be paid to the victim as an expression of remorse.
The appeal court quashed the original sentences and substituted a sentence of similar duration, fully suspended for three and a half years, with 18 months' probation supervision. The revised order therefore extended the suspension and supervision periods. The court said its practical effect left Moore at risk of imprisonment for almost seven and a half years from the assault if he became involved in criminal activity during that period.
The attack occurred at about 4am on 3 June 2013 as the victim walked home after a night out. Moore demanded his wallet and kicked him about ten times while he was on the ground. The wallet was taken and later found on Moore. The victim suffered a broken nose, jaw fractures, a soft-tissue leg injury and bruising, but made a good recovery.
The judgment recorded Moore's mistaken belief that the victim had previously struck a woman among the original mitigating factors, alongside his co-operation, admissions and lack of serious previous convictions. It also recorded remorse and significant medical difficulties. However, the appeal court described the assault as completely unprovoked and said a significant portion of the sentence should have involved immediate custody.