The Court of Appeal has dismissed Antonia McGrath’s appeal against the severity of a three-and-a-half-year prison sentence for possessing cannabis and cannabis resin valued at about €450,000.
The ex tempore judgment, delivered by Mr Justice McCarthy on 25 January 2019, concerned an offence on 25 May 2017. McGrath had pleaded guilty at an early stage to an offence under section 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Acts. The sentence was imposed by Judge Nolan at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court.
Gardaí conducted surveillance near McGrath’s home at Aras na Cluaine apartments, Nangor Road, Clondalkin, after receiving confidential information. The judgment says co-accused Keith Tiswell drove into the apartment complex car park and left about 20 minutes later. A later vehicle stop uncovered 5.98kg of cannabis. CCTV showed McGrath carrying cannabis in the car park and putting it in the car boot, where the drugs were found.
A search of McGrath’s apartment under warrant found 16.39kg of cannabis herb and 1.43kg of cannabis resin, valued together at €336,380. With the drugs found in the car, the total value was about €450,000.
After her arrest, McGrath said she could not provide information of material assistance to Gardaí because she felt under threat. She said she had become involved because she feared for her son’s safety. The appeal grounds argued that the sentence did not sufficiently reflect her early guilty plea, personal circumstances, previous good character, cooperation, and the threat to her and her son.
The appeal court noted that the sentencing judge had inferred that McGrath was addicted to some form of drugs and had been pressured by third parties to store drugs in connection with obligations. The appeal judgment said the evidence did not show that her prescription medication was illicitly supplied or obtained, or that her addiction led to her involvement. It said her prescription medication addiction and what was described as a chaotic lifestyle had some relevance to mitigation.
The court said the statutory starting point for this type of offence was a mandatory minimum of 10 years, but the trial judge had departed substantially from that minimum because of mitigating factors. It concluded the three-and-a-half-year term was within the available range and that there had been no error of principle. The appeal was dismissed.