The Court of Appeal has dismissed a prosecution appeal against the sentence imposed on Sharon Flanagan for possessing cannabis for supply, leaving in place a five-year prison term suspended in full for five years.
The appeal, brought under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, argued that the sentence was unduly lenient. The court delivered judgment on 1 May 2015. It found no error of principle and concluded that the circumstances justified the wholly suspended sentence.
Flanagan had pleaded guilty to an offence under section 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977. The sentencing judge set a headline term of seven years before mitigation, then reduced it to five years and suspended the full term. The judge had found exceptional and specific circumstances making the presumptive minimum 10-year sentence unjust.
The Court of Appeal said the offending was serious. Garda evidence at the sentencing hearing described seven kilograms of cannabis resin, valued at €42,596, found at Flanagan’s residence in Cappacasheen, Kinvara, in October 2011. The cannabis had been concealed in timber. Garda evidence also described €27,890 in cash found on the property. The court accepted that the concealment was sophisticated and that Flanagan had previous drug convictions.
The appeal court considered whether the sentencing judge had allowed too much for mitigation. It recognised that a custodial sentence, often a substantial one, would normally be expected in a section 15A case. But it said the law did not rule out a non-custodial sentence in a rare case where wholly exceptional circumstances justified it.
The court relied on Flanagan’s guilty plea, remorse and cooperation, along with probation reports describing her engagement with drug treatment, counselling and supervision. The reports said she had remained drug-free for more than 14 months by February 2014 and had made positive changes in her life. The court also considered her exceptionally difficult personal history and her conduct during the year-long adjournment before sentence was imposed.
It concluded that these circumstances amounted to special reasons of a substantial nature and particularly exceptional circumstances. The appeal was dismissed, so the five-year sentence remained suspended in full for five years.