The Court of Appeal has dismissed Sean Everitt’s appeal against the severity of consecutive sentences totalling eight and a half years’ imprisonment, with the final 12 months suspended, for drug dealing and aggravated burglary.
The ex tempore judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Donnelly on 28 March 2022, concerned a €35,863 seizure of cocaine and cannabis from Everitt’s rented bedroom on 12 May 2019 and an aggravated burglary at a family home in Louth on 24 September 2019. He was on bail for the drug offence when the burglary occurred. He was 19 at the time of the offences and had no previous convictions.
For the drug offence, contrary to section 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, the sentencing judge imposed four years’ imprisonment. She placed the offending at the upper end of the mid-range, but departed from the presumptive 10-year minimum in light of mitigation including Everitt’s early guilty plea, cooperation, age and personal circumstances. The Court of Appeal found no error in that approach or in the sentence.
The burglary involved four men, two of whom entered the house wearing masks and gloves. One carried a wheel brace and shouted, “Where’s the safe?” The householder and her husband drove the intruders out; nothing was taken and no one was injured. The sentencing judge set a seven-year headline sentence, then imposed four and a half years, with the final year suspended. The Court of Appeal held that the joint enterprise, weapon, confrontation with an occupant and planned use of a car supported placing the offence in the mid-range. It found no error in the seven-year headline sentence or the term imposed.
Everitt argued that the judge had failed to apply the totality principle, among other grounds. The appeal court said the judge’s brief use of “concurrent” was a slip that she corrected in open court: she had intended the sentences to run consecutively and had considered totality and proportionality. It also rejected the argument that taking related section 15 drug counts into consideration affected the sentence, noting that those counts concerned the same drugs.
The court considered whether the overall sentence was disproportionate or crushing, given Everitt’s age and lack of prior convictions. It concluded that, although long, the sentence was not disproportionate in view of the seriousness of the offences and the burglary having been committed while he was on bail. The appeal was dismissed.