The Court of Appeal has refused an application by the Director of Public Prosecutions to review as unduly lenient a 12-month prison sentence imposed on Donna Hutch for possessing a syringe. The court said the sentence was lenient but found no error in principle in the sentencing judge’s approach.
The sentence was imposed in the Dublin Circuit Court on 18 June 2015 and backdated to 15 May 2015, when Hutch pleaded guilty to possessing a syringe contrary to section 7(1) and (2) of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997. An assault count was taken into consideration at sentencing. The Court of Appeal delivered its judgment on 31 May 2016.
The offence occurred on 10 September 2014. The judgment said Garda John O’Donovan saw Hutch in Amiens Street before encountering her again at the railings of the Custom House. He said she had a syringe needle in her hand and blood was visible on her hand. She struck out at him and continued trying to stab him with the syringe while he restrained her wrists, the judgment said. A member of the public intervened. Hutch eventually dropped the syringe; the barrel was later found after she took it from her trousers and swallowed it.
Hutch later spoke voluntarily to gardaí at the Dóchas Health Centre, accepted what she had done, apologised and thanked them for trying to help her, according to the judgment. The court said she had known O’Donovan for more than 20 years and had a good relationship with him. It said she had failed to recognise him and was hallucinating after taking crystal methamphetamine. The court said she had not gone out intending to produce the syringe or harm anyone.
The judgment recorded 313 previous convictions, including one involving the threatening production of a syringe. It also noted evidence that Hutch routinely told gardaí if she had a syringe so they would not be endangered. At sentencing, the Circuit Court judge had considered her progress in custody and a reduction in her methadone dosage.
The DPP argued that the sentencing judge had not properly assessed the offence’s seriousness, given sufficient weight to Hutch’s record, or addressed general deterrence. The Court of Appeal acknowledged the sentence was lenient and said a substantial sentence would ordinarily be expected. But it concluded the judge had recognised the case’s unusual circumstances and carefully fashioned a sentence for it. Finding no error in principle, the court refused the application and did not consider developments since the Circuit Court sentence.