The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against the severity of a six-year prison sentence imposed on Kevin Corcoran for sexual assault. The court found no error in principle in the sentencing judge’s approach, including the decision not to suspend part of the sentence.
The appeal concerned a sentence imposed in Galway Circuit Criminal Court on 11 December 2019, after a jury convicted Corcoran of one count of sexual assault. The sentence was backdated to 8 November 2019. The Court of Appeal delivered its judgment on 22 November 2021.
The judgment says the offence occurred in November 2015, when the complainant was 16 and Corcoran was 21. The court recounted her evidence that, after they went upstairs in a public house and guesthouse, Corcoran took her phone when she tried to leave a room, pushed her onto a bed and sexually assaulted her. She told him to stop and screamed. She later sought help and reported what had happened to her mother. The judgment records that an examination found damage to the wall of her vagina and that her jeans’ zip was damaged.
At sentencing, the trial judge placed the offence in the mid-range of gravity and treated the complainant’s age and the significant impact on her life as aggravating factors. Corcoran had 52 previous convictions, including road traffic, theft, public order, criminal damage, drugs and assault offences. The judge said the record meant he was not a person of good character and resulted in a progressive loss of mitigation. The judge also found little mitigation, noting the absence of a guilty plea and remorse, and recommended access to treatment while in custody.
On appeal, Corcoran’s counsel accepted that the six-year headline sentence was not objectionable but argued that the judge had failed to give adequate weight to mitigation and rehabilitation. Counsel said the previous offences were not sexual, argued their effect on mitigation should be modest, and referred to Corcoran’s attendance at a drug rehabilitation centre in Germany. The Director of Public Prosecutions supported the sentence, submitting that the trial judge was entitled to find no real mitigating factor.
The Court of Appeal said there was no remorse or acceptance of guilt at sentencing. It noted that the appellant was said on appeal to accept the verdict, but treated that as counsel’s instruction rather than a factor for consideration. The court considered there was an evidential basis for the sentencing judge’s view that rehabilitation had little reality in the case. It said a first conviction on indictment did not mean that part of the sentence ought to be suspended, and dismissed the appeal.