The Court of Appeal has dismissed Michael Byrne’s appeals against the severity of consecutive prison sentences imposed for two robberies, finding no error of principle in the sentencing judge’s approach.
The judgment, delivered on 22 October 2015 by Mr Justice Edwards, concerned two guilty pleas in Dublin Circuit Criminal Court. Byrne received two years for robbing a 13-year-old boy on a DART train on 1 March 2014, and three years for a cash-in-transit robbery on 28 April 2014. The terms were consecutive, producing what the sentencing judge described as an effective five-year sentence after taking account of time already spent in custody.
The first robbery involved the boy’s iPhone, headphones, iPad, iPod and about €6 in cash. The judgment put the total value of property taken at €1,700. It said Byrne admitted being present and receiving some proceeds, while maintaining that the other man carried out the robbery. He pleaded guilty.
In the second incident, a security worker carrying a cash box containing €50,000 was struck outside an AIB branch in Raheny. The box was taken, but the money was covered in green dye after it was forcibly opened. Byrne made admissions about his involvement, later seeking to retract some of them. He pleaded guilty to robbery; a linked criminal damage count was discontinued by a nolle prosequi.
Byrne argued on appeal that the sentences were excessive, that the judge had not adequately considered his personal circumstances, and that he had not received proper credit for time on remand. His challenge based on the sentence imposed on a co-accused was not pursued. The prosecution argued that the overall sentence was proportionate and that the sentencing judge had expressly considered both the guilty pleas and the time in custody.
The appeal court said the cash-in-transit robbery was an aggravating factor because it was committed while Byrne was on bail for the DART robbery. It also found that the judge had considered mitigating factors, including rehabilitation, and was entitled to refuse to suspend part of the sentence given Byrne’s record and earlier leniency.
On remand credit, the court said the judge had specifically taken the roughly six months in custody into account when setting the sentence. It concluded Byrne was not disadvantaged by that approach and dismissed both appeals. The court did not alter the sentences.