The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal against the severity of a four-year sentence imposed on D McD for his part in a serious robbery and assault incident involving three 15-year-old boys in Dublin in June 2018. The court quashed the sentence imposed by the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court and substituted four years’ imprisonment, suspending the final eight months under specified conditions.
The offences arose from one incident on 27 June 2018. The judgment says a group of eight or nine people approached the boys in Crescent Park. They were threatened, taken to Fairview Park and told to hand over their phones and money. The group later went to a shop, where an attempt was made to use a bank card taken from one of the boys, and then to Tech 4U on Philipsburgh Avenue. At Tolka Park, D McD kicked and punched one of the boys while others assaulted the remaining boys. The incident lasted about an hour and a half or less.
The Circuit Court sentenced D McD on one count of false imprisonment, taking the other charges into consideration. The indictment included three counts each of false imprisonment and robbery, and two counts of assault. He was close to turning 18 when sentenced. The sentencing judge imposed four years’ detention, backdated to 19 January, and directed that the Probation Service supervise him while in custody. The judge did not order post-release supervision, having accepted it could not be enforced under the approach being considered.
The appeal court found, with “considerable hesitation”, that the sentencing judge had erred by not specifically considering whether to defer finalising the sentence so that partial suspension might be available. It recognised the offending was very serious and that the time already being served should be extended significantly. The court said a structured release and an incentive to rehabilitate also had merit, but limited its intervention.
The replacement sentence is four years’ imprisonment, with the final eight months suspended. The suspension is conditional on D McD entering a bond to keep the peace and be of good behaviour during custody and for three years after release. For the first eight months after release, he must be supervised by the Probation Service and comply with its directions. The court also gave both sides liberty to apply over the bond’s form or terms.
In reaching its decision, the court considered updated mitigation material, including a positive report describing D McD’s participation in education and support programmes in prison. The judgment records that the three injured boys were significantly affected; one had a permanent scar beside his eye and did not return to school that year.