The Court of Appeal has quashed a two-year sentence imposed on Justin Doody for arson and resentenced him to three years’ imprisonment, after finding that the original sentence was unduly lenient.
The judgment, delivered on 26 February 2024, followed an application by the Director of Public Prosecutions under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993. Doody had originally received two years for setting fire to a laundrette, with the final six months suspended. The sentence was concurrent with a sentence for a drugs offence.
The fire was discovered at about 5.45am on 4 August 2019 at a laundrette in Courtown. Gardaí estimated damage at about €18,249. The machines were effectively decommissioned, and the laundrette ceased trading. The court heard that staff accommodation was located above a pub in the same complex. CCTV showed two men near a parked car before the fire and leaving the area on foot. Gardaí identified Doody in the footage.
Doody initially pleaded not guilty. After a jury was sworn and some evidence heard, he pleaded guilty the following day. The sentencing judge had set a notional term of three years, then reduced it to two years in light of mitigation including Doody’s family circumstances, remorse, prison conduct and apology.
The Director argued that the headline sentence was too low, that aggravating factors and damage had not received enough weight, and that the arson term should not have been concurrent with the drugs sentence. Doody’s counsel argued that the fire was brief and not out of control, the laundrette was not close to dwellings, and the premises were not shown to have been rendered inoperable. The defence also cited insurance payments covering two-thirds of the damage and argued that a consecutive sentence would have been crushing.
The Court of Appeal said the original headline sentence was too low and that concurrency compounded the error. It noted the damage, the loss of the tenant’s business and the staff accommodation above the adjacent pub. The court also said evidence of “bad blood” between Doody and the tenant had not been fully explored. It quashed the original sentence and resentenced him de novo.
The court assessed the appropriate headline sentence at five years. It considered the late guilty plea, updated reports, apology, personal circumstances and prospect of rehabilitation, alongside Doody’s previous convictions. It said it would otherwise have imposed three and a half years, but imposed three years to run from 26 February 2024.