The Court of Appeal reduced the prison term activated against Dean O’Mahony from four years to three, finding the original activation disproportionate. It quashed the four-year sentence and resentenced him on 28 July 2017, leaving the remaining three years suspended for three years after his release, on similar conditions to those set below.
O’Mahony had pleaded guilty to five drug offences and one handling stolen property offence at Clonmel Circuit Criminal Court. In November 2014, he received a total six-year prison sentence, dated from 22 July 2014, which was suspended in full. Conditions included keeping the peace and being of good behaviour for five years, attending addiction services, and remaining under Probation Service supervision for two years. He also undertook to raise €1,000 each year for five years for the AisEiri centre in Cahir.
In June 2015, during the suspension period, he stole a Liverpool football club jersey worth €74 from a sports shop in Clonmel. He admitted the theft after being interviewed and shown CCTV footage. He said he could not remember the incident because he had been drinking and taking prescription drugs. The judgment records that he later paid full compensation. He received a month in prison for the theft in the District Court.
The judge who had imposed the suspended sentence later activated four years and suspended the remaining two years for three years, subject to conditions. The Court of Appeal considered O’Mahony’s appeal against the four-year activation. His lawyers argued that the theft was minor and caused no ultimate loss to the shop, and that the original suspension conditions were onerous.
The appeal court said the triggering theft was minor and, by itself, called for a lenient sentence. But it also said the judge was entitled to consider other information about compliance with the suspension conditions, including multiple breaches, and noted that the original offences had been committed while an earlier sentence was suspended. The court said the fully suspended six-year term had likely been set at that length because it was suspended in full.
It concluded that activating four years was disproportionate. It ordered three years of the original term activated, dating from the same date directed by the lower court. The other three years remain suspended for three years after release, on similar conditions.