The Court of Appeal increased the sentence imposed on Luke Foran for a series of offences, including a garage burglary and damage in Fairview, Dublin, and a later burglary of an elderly woman’s home. It found the overall sentence imposed in the Circuit Court was unduly lenient, quashed it and resentenced him to five years’ imprisonment, with the final year suspended.
The Director of Public Prosecutions had sought a review under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993. Foran had pleaded guilty to counts on three bills of indictment. In February 2018, the Circuit Court imposed an aggregate sentence of three years and three months, with the final nine months suspended.
The Court of Appeal judgment said the garage offences arose from events in March 2017. Foran entered a family-owned garage in Fairview, ransacked it and stole items, then took a BMW and crashed it into a pole. He returned and stole a Hyundai to leave the scene. The judgment said he drove into other cars and the garage’s electronic shutters, causing damage totalling €20,300. He later set fire to the Hyundai in the Dublin Port area.
In May 2017, while on bail for the earlier offences, he entered a woman’s home while she was at Sunday Mass. The judgment said the 80-year-old victim’s house was ransacked, and her purse and bank cards were stolen. The cards were later used at an ATM in Killester to withdraw €1,480 from her account. The damage to a window and door required replacement locks costing €240.
The Director argued that the sentences for the garage offences and the domestic burglary were unduly lenient. Foran’s counsel accepted that the sentences were lenient, even very lenient, but argued that they remained within the available range. The Court of Appeal said the Director had to show a substantial departure from the norm before it could intervene.
The court cited the scale of the garage damage, the victim’s account of the incident and the serious impact of the home burglary on the elderly victim. It also noted Foran’s previous convictions, guilty plea, youth and engagement with rehabilitation services. The court said an aggregate sentence of six years, with the final year suspended, would otherwise be appropriate, but limited its intervention because it had to sentence him as of the hearing date and considered the substantial increase difficult for him.
The court imposed three years on Bill 532/17, two years concurrent on the arson count in Bill 771/17, and two years on Bill 1166/17, consecutive to the earlier sentences. The final year of the aggregate sentence was suspended on conditions similar to those imposed by the Circuit Court.