Judgment: 2018-06-08 · Court archive

Court of Appeal replaces two-year term with suspended four years to support rehabilitation

The court upheld the need for immediate custody after a serious robbery but changed the sentence to encourage the appellant’s rehabilitation.

Court of Appeal ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Christopher Morgan (Appellant)
  • Declan Foran
What

The court upheld the need for immediate custody after a serious robbery but changed the sentence to encourage the appellant’s rehabilitation.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Sackville Place
  • Dublin
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 29 September 2016; 25 January 2018

    Morgan was convicted at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court on 25 January 2018 of robbing Declan Foran. The charge arose from an assault on 29 September 2016 at Sackville Place in Dublin. The judgment said Foran and his brother were homeless and sleeping on the street when a woman approached them. She later returned with two men, including Morgan.

  • 16 February 2018

    Morgan appealed the sentence imposed on 16 February 2018. His grounds included that the sentencing judge had not given adequate weight to rehabilitation efforts, reports supporting his progress, and his guilty plea and circumstances. The judgment recorded 101 previous convictions, including offences involving violence, robbery, burglary and theft, as well as earlier prison terms.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Court of Appeal allowed Christopher Morgan’s appeal against a two-year prison sentence for robbery, replacing it with a five-year term that includes four years suspended. The court said the crime required a custodial sentence, but found the sentencing judge had erred by failing to structure it to support Morgan’s rehabilitation.

The Court of Appeal allowed Christopher Morgan’s appeal against a two-year prison sentence for robbery, replacing it with a five-year term that includes four years suspended. The court said the crime required a custodial sentence, but found the sentencing judge had erred by failing to structure it to support Morgan’s rehabilitation.

Morgan was convicted at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court on 25 January 2018 of robbing Declan Foran. The charge arose from an assault on 29 September 2016 at Sackville Place in Dublin. The judgment said Foran and his brother were homeless and sleeping on the street when a woman approached them. She later returned with two men, including Morgan.

The court described the attack as unprovoked and exceptionally violent. Foran was punched in the face and kicked between the legs while his pockets were searched. His newly purchased mobile phone was stolen. He went to hospital but left before receiving treatment for a cut above his right eye and swelling to his face. The phone was later found on Morgan, along with blood stains forensically linked to Foran.

Morgan appealed the sentence imposed on 16 February 2018. His grounds included that the sentencing judge had not given adequate weight to rehabilitation efforts, reports supporting his progress, and his guilty plea and circumstances. The judgment recorded 101 previous convictions, including offences involving violence, robbery, burglary and theft, as well as earlier prison terms.

The Court of Appeal acknowledged the seriousness of the robbery and Morgan’s record. It also considered reports describing his engagement with addiction services, education and support programmes, and his progress in remaining drug-free. The court concluded that the sentencing judge had considered rehabilitation but had not structured the sentence to facilitate it. The court said the decision to impose custody was correct given the crime’s seriousness.

The appeal court replaced the original sentence with five years’ imprisonment, with the final four years suspended for three years after release. The suspended portion is conditional on Morgan entering a €100 bond to keep the peace and be of good behaviour, and complying with Probation Service requirements during that period. The sentence was ordered to run from 25 January 2018.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review