The Court of Appeal has dismissed a man’s appeal against a three-year prison sentence for damaging the lock of an occupied house in Ballina, finding no error of principle in the sentencing judge’s decision.
The appellant had pleaded guilty to one count of criminal damage and was convicted at Castlebar Circuit Criminal Court on 13 October 2015. On 29 October, he received three years’ imprisonment, with the final 18 months suspended for five years after his release, on condition that he enter a €100 bond to keep the peace during that period.
The offence took place on 19 May 2015. The judgment says the appellant broke through a door into the house’s porch but could not enter the main house because an internal door was locked. Gardaí arrived promptly. Damage to the door’s lock mechanism was estimated at €200. The house was occupied at the time.
The appeal challenged the sentence as excessive and argued that the sentencing judge had not given proper weight to mitigating circumstances, including the guilty plea, remorse, an offer of compensation, alcohol addiction and cooperation with gardaí. The appellant also argued that the judge had placed undue weight on his previous convictions. The sentencing judge had cited the guilty plea, apology and €200 compensation offer as mitigating factors, and the late-night timing and occupied home as aggravating factors.
The Court of Appeal noted that the appellant had 96 previous convictions, including convictions for burglary, theft, drug offences and assault, as well as many public order offences. It also addressed his serious alcohol addiction and intoxication at the scene, saying that self-induced intoxication does not generally justify a more lenient sentence.
The court said the damage was relatively minor in value, but the offence involved an occupied private residence and deliberate damage to a device intended to secure it against intruders. It considered the sentence to be at the upper end of the appropriate range, but one the sentencing judge was entitled to impose given the appellant’s record and the limited prospects for rehabilitation identified at sentencing.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The judgment does not alter the original sentence or its suspension conditions.