The Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the Director of Public Prosecutions’ appeal against the sentences imposed on Anthony McMahon for attacks on two psychiatric hospital staff members, ruling that sentencing could not be used to create open-ended preventive detention.
McMahon pleaded guilty to causing serious harm to consultant psychiatrist Dr Ananth Pullela and assault causing harm to psychologist Dr Catherine Burns. The attacks took place at St Anne’s Day Hospital in Limerick on 17 January 2008, according to the judgment. Dr Pullela was stabbed eight times and suffered life-threatening injuries. Dr Burns sustained a penetrating wound that could have been life-threatening.
At sentencing in the Circuit Court in Limerick on 12 May 2009, McMahon received 10 years for causing serious harm and three years for assault causing harm, to run concurrently. The judge did not backdate the terms to account for time already spent in custody; the parties accepted that the sentence was equivalent to 11 and a half years’ imprisonment.
The DPP appealed under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, arguing that the sentence was unduly lenient. The DPP did not contend that the term fell outside the usual range for the serious-harm offence. Instead, it argued that McMahon’s psychiatric illness and the risk he posed to others justified a life sentence to protect the public.
The appeal court considered evidence that McMahon had a prior manslaughter conviction and that a consultant psychiatrist had assessed him as presenting a serious risk of immediate and serious harm at the time of a report. The psychiatrist said McMahon’s condition had improved after treatment with Clozapine, but that the risk of serious violence could rise sharply if he stopped taking it. The judgment also records the psychiatrist’s view that McMahon could have been found not guilty by reason of insanity at trial, but that the sentencing court could not reach that outcome after his guilty plea.
The court said protection of the public is a relevant factor in setting a sentence, and can support a sentence at the higher end of the appropriate range. But it held that, without legislation, a court could not go beyond a sentence proportionate to the offence and impose a life term solely to detain someone because of a predicted future risk.
The judgment said the Mental Health Act 2001 provides a separate process for involuntary detention where its criteria are met, subject to review. The sentencing court could not direct that McMahon receive treatment in prison or that an application under the Act be made. It dismissed the DPP’s appeal, leaving the concurrent sentences in place.