Judgment: 2016-10-07 · Court archive

Court of Appeal dismisses cannabis sentence appeal, with six-week custody credit

The court upheld a three-and-a-half-year sentence for cultivating cannabis in Dublin, but directed that six weeks spent in custody solely for that offence be credited.

The Court of Appeal · 298/15

Who, what, where, when and why

Who

See the report below for the parties involved.

What

The court upheld a three-and-a-half-year sentence for cultivating cannabis in Dublin, but directed that six weeks spent in custody solely for that offence be credited.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Dublin
  • Galway
When

Judgment:

Why

Read the report below for the decision and any reasons given.

The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a three-and-a-half-year prison sentence for cultivating cannabis at an apartment in central Dublin, while directing that the appellant receive credit for six weeks already spent in custody solely for that offence.

The judgment was delivered ex tempore on 7 October 2016 by Mr Justice Sheehan, with Justices Birmingham and Mahon also on the court. The appellant had pleaded guilty on 31 October 2015 to cultivating cannabis on 8 May 2014. He was sentenced on 30 November 2015.

Police found 126 cannabis plants at different stages of growth when they arrested him. The prosecution accepted that he had become involved in the offence to discharge gambling debts. He told gardaí that he expected payment of about €10,000 when the plants were harvested and packaged, but that only a small portion would go to him because the balance was to be retained against his debts.

At sentencing, the appellant also had a conviction for a similar offence in Galway. That offence was committed while he was on bail for the Dublin offence. The judgment said he was apparently required to pay a debt connected with cannabis plants forfeited after his first arrest. At the time of sentence, he was serving a three-year term, with its final year suspended.

For the appellant, it was argued that the Dublin sentence was excessive and unduly severe, given his cooperation with gardaí and personal circumstances, including alleged coercion arising from his gambling debts. The court said the sentencing judge was entitled to treat the Galway offence, committed while on bail, as an aggravating factor. It said involvement in a serious commercial operation was not excused by a motive of clearing gambling debt.

The Court of Appeal did not consider the sentence excessive. It dismissed the appeal, subject to the six-week custody credit. The judgment does not state that the prison term itself was reduced.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review