The Court of Appeal has rejected the Director of Public Prosecutions’ application to review as unduly lenient the wholly suspended five-year sentences imposed on Warren Bale and Kaide Fowler for a cannabis cultivation offence.
The men had pleaded guilty to an offence under section 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, committed on 21 June 2014. At sentencing in Dublin Circuit Criminal Court on 7 May 2015, each received five years’ imprisonment, suspended for five years on condition of good behaviour. The Court of Appeal delivered its judgment on 5 July 2016.
Gardaí found four men cutting cannabis at a property in Meekstown Close, St Margaret’s Road, Finglas. The judgment records 179 mature plants and 65 immature plants, with equipment used for cultivation. The mature plants were valued at €143,200; the immature plants had a potential value of more than €50,000 when fully grown. Bale said he was to receive three ounces of cannabis for his work. Fowler said he expected €200 to €300 and did not know who owned the cannabis.
The DPP argued that the sentencing judge had given insufficient weight to the commercial scale of the operation, aggravating factors and deterrence, among other grounds. The appeal court said the central issue was the decision to suspend the sentences entirely. It applied the test for an undue-leniency review: the DPP had to show a substantial departure from the appropriate sentence and an error of principle, while the sentencing judge was entitled to a margin of discretion.
For Bale, the court cited his prompt guilty plea, lack of previous convictions, serious back pain following a road accident, cannabis dependence, efforts to address his addiction, strong work history and community involvement. It concluded these combined factors provided exceptional circumstances and dismissed the application concerning his sentence.
Fowler had 103 previous convictions, all dealt with in the Children’s Court or District Court, and none since he was 19. The court considered his difficult youth, cannabis addiction and engagement with the Coolmine Therapeutic Community, including his rehabilitation progress and assistance to others. It found the sentencing judge had not erred in principle and that exceptional circumstances justified the suspended sentence.
The court dismissed the application concerning Bale and refused it concerning Fowler. The five-year sentences therefore remained suspended on their original terms; the appeal court did not impose new sentences.