The High Court has ruled that a three-year prison sentence imposed on John Connors for a Carlow burglary followed an unfair hearing because his barrister was refused time to speak with him beforehand.
Connors had pleaded guilty at Carlow Circuit Criminal Court in May 2021 to a burglary committed in November 2014, during which €5,000 was stolen.
His sentencing hearing was listed for July 21, 2021. Connors was already in custody on other matters and was brought late to court by the prison service. His counsel had only recently entered the case and had never met him.
When counsel asked for permission to speak with Connors, the Circuit Court judge refused. Prosecuting counsel then asked that she be given five minutes, but that request was also rejected.
Mr Justice Garrett Simons held that this refusal breached Connors’ right to effective legal representation. He stressed that the adjournment sought was measured in minutes, Connors himself was not responsible for the delay, and a substantial prison sentence was at stake.
The sentencing hearing subsequently raised several disputed matters. A Garda witness referred without advance notice to alleged convictions in England and made an unsubstantiated claim that Connors was a key member of an organised crime gang. The judge also questioned the source of €5,000 offered by Connors’ family as compensation and declined to take that payment into account.
Simons J held that Connors did not have to prove the sentence would have been different if counsel had been allowed to consult him. The denial of a fair procedure was itself sufficient. The transcript nevertheless showed actual potential prejudice, including counsel’s inability to take proper instructions on the alleged English convictions, the compensation money and mitigation letters concerning personal family circumstances.
The judge concluded this was an exceptional case where judicial review, rather than the ordinary appeal process alone, was justified.
His provisional view was to set aside both conviction and sentence and return the case to the Circuit Court for fresh sentencing on the existing guilty plea. Final orders and costs were left for a later hearing.