The Court of Appeal reduced Kevin Ginty’s five-year prison sentence for burglary to two years, finding that the original sentence was out of line with sentences typically imposed for cases of that nature and that an error in principle had occurred.
The judgment, delivered ex tempore on 12 December 2014, concerned an appeal against sentence severity. The Central Criminal Court had imposed the five-year term on 22 July 2013. The burglary involved entering a building as a trespasser and committing assault causing harm, an offence carrying a maximum penalty of 14 years.
The court recounted that the previous evening, Ms. McVeigh had firmly ended her relationship with Ginty and asked him to leave her home. The following night, after she returned home from a party, Ginty forced his way into the house. As she tried to get help, he dragged her back inside, banged her head against the bottom stair and pulled her upstairs. When gardaí called, he answered in an imitated female voice and said Ms. McVeigh had gone to a disco.
The court said the incident caused bruising and abrasions, as well as a significant and persistent impact. Ms. McVeigh moved home afterwards, installed alarms and carried a personal alarm because she had lost her sense of personal security.
The appeal challenged the sentencing judge’s reliance on the Adam Keane case and argued that the sentence was far above typical sentences for such offending. The appellant submitted that, if dealt with in Donegal, the case might have resulted in a non-custodial sentence or a term no longer than 18 months. The judgment noted that no statistical evidence had been presented to support that assertion.
The Court of Appeal said the offence was serious because it violated a dwelling and involved violence against a woman in her own home. It stressed that domestic or quasi-domestic context did not mitigate violence and could aggravate it. However, the court considered that insufficient attention had been paid to Ginty’s lack of previous convictions and that the Adam Keane case was materially different.
Taking account of his clean record and guilty plea, the court set aside the five-year sentence and substituted a two-year prison term. The judgment did not disturb the burglary conviction.