The Court of Appeal has dismissed Paddy Harty’s appeal against the severity of a four-year prison sentence for sexual assault, ruling that the sentence fell within the available range and disclosed no error in principle.
The sentence was imposed by the Central Criminal Court on 29 January 2018, consecutive to a five-year sentence, with the final year suspended, imposed in Galway Circuit Court for theft. The sexual assault sentence also included two years of post-release supervision.
Harty had stood trial on a rape charge. At the close of the prosecution case, the trial judge directed an acquittal on that charge and said she would tell the jury about the alternative verdict of sexual assault. Harty then pleaded guilty to sexual assault. The prosecution accepted that the case should be treated as involving an early guilty plea.
The Court of Appeal’s account said Harty and the complainant met in a pub in Edenderry on 22 April 2013 and later went to other pubs. After they kissed, Harty drove her to a secluded area near the Curragh. The judgment said he removed her leggings and underwear and held her arms forcibly. The complainant left the vehicle, hid in a bushy area, called gardaí while distressed, and later went to a woman’s home, whose call brought gardaí to investigate.
The sentencing judge identified a seven-year pre-mitigation headline sentence, reduced it to five years and then to four years to account for the totality principle and proportionality when making it consecutive to the theft sentence. The appeal focused on the decision to make the terms consecutive. Harty argued the judge was wrong to say a concurrent sentence would mean no additional time in custody, submitting that it would in fact have meant another year in prison.
The Court of Appeal agreed the judge was incorrect about the custody effect of a concurrent five-year term. It said it was unclear whether she had miscalculated or meant that a concurrent term would not add a significant period in custody. But the court found she considered the offence serious and intended Harty to serve a significant period for it. His counsel accepted that an extension of his custody was inevitable. The court concluded the judge appropriately reduced the term by a further year to address totality and proportionality, and dismissed the appeal.