Director of Public Prosecutions v Oloinu

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)
• Judge: Mr. Justice Edwards
• Judgment Date: 26 February 2024
• Neutral Citation: [2024] IECA 97
• Docket Number: Record No. 171/2023

Between/

The People (At the Suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions)

Respondent

and

Nicholas Oloinu

Appellant

[2024] IECA 97

Edwards J.

McCarthy J.

Burns J.

Record No. 171/2023

THE COURT OF APPEAL

JUDGMENT of the Court delivered ( ex tempore) by Mr. Justice Edwards on the 26 ^th of February 2024.

Introduction

1 . Before this Court is an appeal brought by Mr. Nicholas Oloinu (i.e, “the appellant”) against the severity of the sentence imposed on him on the 25 ^th of May 2023 by the Western Circuit Criminal Court sitting in Galway. On that date, having previously entered a guilty plea in respect of one count (count no. 1 on Bill No. GYDP0098/2022) of money laundering contrary to s. 7(1)(a)(ii), 7(1)(b) and 7(3) of the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010 (i.e., “the Act of 2010”) and in respect of one count (count no. 2 on the same indictment) of possession of a controlled drug with aggregate market value in excess of €13,000.00 for the purposes of sale or supply contrary to ss. 15A and 27(3A) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, as amended (i.e., “the Act of 1977”), the appellant was sentenced to a global term of 9 years' imprisonment, the final 12 months thereof suspended on certain conditions.

2 . By Notice of Appeal dated the 12 ^th of June 2023, Mr. Oloinu appealed to this Court against the severity of the said sentence, and he advanced six grounds in support of his appeal:

• “ 1. The Headline sentence fixed by the learned Sentence Judge (sic) was excessive in all the circumstances of the case;

• 2. The Actual, or effective, sentence imposed by the learned Sentence judge was excessive in all the circumstances of the case;

• 3. The Sentence imposed by the Learned Sentencing Judge was unduly severe;

• 4. The Learned sentencing Judge failed to give appropriate weight to the items of mitigation in the case and in particular, the entering of a signed plea of guilty in the District Court and the extensive level of participation in Gardaí investigations, my age at the time of the offence and that it was my first conviction;

• 5. The learned Judge erred in determining that there were sufficient factors present, allowing him to derogate from the mandatory minimum sentence required in S15(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1977, and subsequently determining that the appropriate headline sentence should exceed the mandatory minimum tariff;

• 6. The Learned Sentencing Judge erred in determining the appropriate headline/ effective sentence S7(1)(a)(ii) and S7(1)(b) & S7(3) of the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010”.

Factual Background

3 . The sentencing hearing in the court below was held on the 25 ^th of May 2023. On that date a Garda Pat Casey (otherwise “Garda Casey”) gave evidence in relation to the factual background to the appellant's offending. In advance of Garda Casey's evidence, counsel for the prosecution reminded the sentencing court that the matter was last before the court on the 7 ^th of December 2022 for arraignment and it was on this date that the appellant had entered a guilty plea in respect of count nos. 1 and 2 on the indictment. It was said that this plea was entered on a full-facts basis.

Garda search and seizure of controlled drugs

4 . Garda Casey recalled his attendance on the 25 ^th of June 2021 at a residential premises on the Newcastle Road in Galway on foot of a warrant obtained in respect of that property. He stated that the background to this attendance was that in June 2021 gardaí attached to the division drugs unit in Galway became aware of a male who was supplying cocaine in and around the city. An operation was devised by the unit, and the male in question was identified as a Mr. Nicholas Oloinu, the herein appellant. On the 25 ^th of June 2021, a search warrant was obtained pursuant to s. 26 of the Act of 1977 in respect of the residential premises on the Newcastle Road. Upon arrival at the premises, the appellant, who was present at the back door to the property, was furnished with a copy of the search warrant and it was explained to him why gardaí were in attendance there.

5 . In the course of the search of the premises, in particular the appellant's bedroom, gardaí found a quantity of cocaine, cannabis, dealing bags, and a digital weighing scales which was located within a jacket hanging on the back of the bedroom door. The quantity of cocaine found was weighed at 48 grammes. A further search of the bedroom yielded discovery of approximately €2,860 in cash which was concealed in a bedside locker. As gardaí continued their search of the property, the appellant informed them that he had more cocaine concealed in a wheelie bin at the rear of the property. When gardaí went to inspect this bin, they discovered that a black bag containing two bags of white powder was concealed therein, which substance was subsequently tested and found to be cocaine. The quantity of cocaine found in the wheelie bin was assessed at 1,886 grammes. Garda Casey stated that this quantity was valued at €132,041, which he further stated made it one of the largest seizures in Galway city in recent years.

6 . Garda Casey would later state in his evidence that the appellant was one of the largest suppliers of cocaine in Galway city at the time of the search, and that a lot of Garda resources were used in connection with this matter. Garda Casey went on to describe the appellant as having been “ a considerable drain on the resources of the division drugs unit, within Galway”.

Garda interviews with the appellant

7 . The appellant was arrested at the residential premises the subject of the Garda search. He was thereafter conveyed to the North Western Regional Garda Headquarters and was there detained. In the course of his detention, he was interviewed on two occasions. Garda Casey stated that during these interviews the appellant was co-operative, and it was said that he gave an account which outlined how he had operated his drug dealing business. The appellant described to gardaí that he had approximately 300 customers who were mainly college students within the city of Galway. He stated that his drug dealing business had a potential to make up to €3,000 a day selling cocaine. He told gardaí that his intention with the cocaine that gardaí had seized at the Newcastle Road property was to double his money by selling it. He later told gardaí that he was not a user of cocaine himself, and that he had used the proceeds from his dealing to fund an indulgent lifestyle, and that he had sent a sum of money to his mother who lived in the south-east of the country. He further stated in interview that he was not in legitimate employment, and that he was in receipt of social welfare payments.

Personal Circumstances of the Appellant

8 . At the time of the offending the appellant was aged approximately 21 years; he was aged approximately 23 years at the time of sentencing. He entered a guilty plea before the court below on the 7 ^th of December 2022, having previously been returned on the 24 ^th of October 2022.

9 . The appellant is originally from Waterford where his family still resides. Garda Casey in cross-examination was not able to confirm the appellant's country of origin, though a Probation Report dated the 23 ^rd of May 2023 indicated that he was born in Lagos, Nigeria and that his family had immigrated to Ireland when he was approximately 5 years of age. The Probation Report further spoke of the appellant's family circumstances, referred to the appellant's exposure to domestic violence and physical abuse at a young age, reported that the appellant had a close relationship with his mother, and stated that the appellant's parents are in poor physical health. It was further stated in the Probation Report in respect of this close relationship that the appellant felt as though he had left his mother down by his involvement in the present offending. The Probation Report further referred to the appellant's partner of four and a half years. The appellant advised the probation officer that she was his “ main support system” and that she did not tolerate his offending. He further described her as “ his only friend”, self-describing himself as an introvert. He did not report being engaged in any hobbies.

10 . Garda Casey stated that the appellant had arrived in Galway purportedly to study, though there was no record of him undertaking any education or training while there. The Probation Report spoke of the appellant having been educated to Leaving Certificate level and having completed a Post Leaving Certificate course in business. The appellant further advised the probation officer that he had commenced a Business Information Systems Bachelor of Science degree course at National University of Ireland Galway, but that he had struggled with finding accommodation and managing finances in the first year, resulting in him failing his freshman year. The appellant further advised the probation officer that he had worked in two separate supermarkets and as a general operative. He had established an online business with his girlfriend selling contact lenses, and he stated that, at the time of the Probation Report, he was not in receipt of social welfare payments. He expressed a willingness to return to education.

11 . Garda Casey stated that the appellant had come to adverse Garda attention in the past, but that he had no previous convictions to his name. However, Garda Casey did refer to an appearance on the 3 ^rd of November 2021 before the Galway District Court on foot of a summons in relation to offending contrary to s. 3 of the Act of 1977, for which he was said to have received the benefit of s. 1 of the Probation of Offenders Act 1907. Garda Casey stated that the appellant had seven outstanding drug-related matters before the Galway District Court in respect of offending which...