The Court of Appeal has dismissed Stephen Hendrick’s appeal against the severity of an eight-year prison sentence for possessing a firearm and explosives. It concluded the sentence was within the available range and that no error of principle had been shown.
The appeal concerned sentences imposed by the Special Criminal Court on 24 February 2016. The eight-year terms for the firearm and explosives offences were concurrent with each other, but consecutive to a three-year sentence for possessing ammunition. The three-year sentence was not under appeal. Hendrick argued that the overall term was excessive and breached the totality principle.
The ammunition offence arose from a search in early July 2013 of a storage container at a site behind Right Price Cars on Turnapin Great, Old Airport Road, Cloughran. Gardaí found Hendrick wearing latex gloves and holding a shotgun cartridge. A plastic box in the container held 59 rounds of ammunition of various calibres.
The offences carrying the eight-year sentence arose from a search on 15 November 2014 at Hendrick’s home on Balbutcher Drive, Ballymun. Gardaí found black powder and a firearm component in the house. A search of a shed uncovered a Glock pistol, firearm parts, an adapted mobile phone described in court as a remote initiator for an improvised explosive device, and an AK47 rifle with a magazine and 125 rounds of ammunition. Other ammunition and three test tubes were also recovered. One contained PETN, described in the judgment as a high-grade military explosive; the others contained pyrotechnic mixtures, one with an airbag initiator. An army bomb disposal team carried out controlled explosions at the site.
The judgment records that Gardaí had intelligence indicating Hendrick was involved in importing firearm parts. His involvement in importation was not disputed, though his counsel argued that importing in his own name showed a lack of sophistication and forensic awareness. The second offence was committed while Hendrick was on bail for the earlier ammunition offence, a circumstance the parties accepted required consecutive sentences.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the Special Criminal Court that the offences were serious, particularly the later offences. It said the sentencing court had considered the guilty pleas and the factors advanced in mitigation, including Hendrick’s personal circumstances. Finding no error of principle, the Court dismissed the appeal.