DPP v D (L)

JurisdictionIreland
JudgeMr. Justice Edwards
Judgment Date17 December 2014
Neutral Citation[2014] IECA 53
Docket NumberAppeal Number: 41/2014
CourtCourt of Appeal (Ireland)
Date17 December 2014

[2014] IECA 53

THE COURT OF APPEAL

Birmingham J.

Irvine J.

Edwards J.

Appeal Number: 41/2014
DPP v D (L)
The People at the Suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
- v -
LD
Appellant

DPP v M (J) 2002 1 IR 363 2002/10/2259

Appeal – Sentence Severity – Sexual Offences – Mitigating Factors – Health –Practice and Procedures

Facts: This case was concerned with an appeal against the severity of certain sentences imposed on the appellant by the Central Criminal Court following his conviction by a jury on the 12th December 2013 upon an indictment charging him with thirty counts of sexual offences inflicted on his two daughters. The trial judge imposed sentences of fifteen years on each of the rape counts, which involved both victims, with the last three years suspended in each case for a period of three years; and sentences of three years on each of the six counts of indecent assault, which related solely to the victim YZ. All sentences were to run concurrently from the 12th of December 2013. The appellant complained that the trial judge failed to give adequate consideration to: (1) the age of the appellant; (2) the state of health of the appellant as mitigating factors; and (3) that he failed to give a sufficient discount from the headline sentence of fifteen years by way of mitigation.

Held by Justice Edwards in light of the available evidence and submissions presented that the trial judge had taken full account of all matters that were advanced in mitigation on the appellant"s behalf. Having considered the mitigating circumstances including his age, his state of health, the apology, the fact that he had no previous convictions and the period of time that had elapsed since the abuse ended, the Court was satisfied that the trial judge was entitled to sentence the appellant in the manner that he did. The Court was further satisfied that adequate allowance was made for mitigating circumstances. In conclusion, Justice Edwards considered that the sentencing judge did not err in principle in suspending the last three years of the headline sentence of fifteen years as a means of making of due and appropriate allowance for the mitigating circumstances in the case. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

1

1. This is an appeal against the severity of certain sentences imposed on the appellant in this case by the Central Criminal Court following his conviction by a jury on the 12 th December 2013 upon a indictment charging him with thirty counts of sexual offences.

2

2. Nineteen of those thirty counts consisted of thirteen rapes and six indecent assaults perpetrated between 1975 and 1991 upon a victim, WX, who was born on a date in 1968. The remaining eleven offences were all rapes that occurred between 1978 and 1988 and involved a second victim, YZ, who was born on a date in 1973.

3

3. The appellant is the father of both victims.

4

4. The trial judge imposed sentences of fifteen years on each of the rape counts, which involve both victims, with the last three years suspended in each case for a period of three years; and sentences of three years on each of the six counts of indecent assault, which relate solely to the victim YZ. All sentences were to run concurrently from the 12 th of December 2013.

5

5. The appeal is against severity of sentencing. No complaint is made concerning where the trial judge placed the offending conduct on the range of potential penalties that might be imposed by the court. In the case of the rape offences specifically, which constituted the overwhelming majority of the relevant offences, the appellant does not complain about the trial judge taking a fifteen year sentence as his starting point. Rather, he complains that the trial judge failed to give adequate consideration to 1) the age of the appellant and 2) the state of health of the appellant as mitigating factors, and that he failed to give a sufficient discount from the headline sentence of fifteen years by way of mitigation.

6

6. In support of this contention significant reliance has been placed on certain jurisprudence, to which this Court has been referred, relating to how a sentencing court should treat an appellant in advanced age or in frail health, or a combination of both. In particular, the appellant relies on the judgment in the case of the Director of Public Prosecutions v. JM [2002] 1 I.R.363 with which this court is familiar and in respect of which it is unnecessary to set forth the details.

7

7. However, it is necessary for the purposes of this judgment to refer in a little detail to some of the circumstances of the present case. The offending in this case took place over a thirteen year span and the abuse of the victim, YZ, continued until she was nineteen years of age, from a fairly young age, and in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • DPP v E.R
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 3 Julio 2020
    ...of eight years was increased to fourteen years for the rape and sexual assault of a neighbour's daughter. In The People (DPP) v. LD [2014] IECA 53 a sentence of fifteen years with three years suspended was upheld in respect of the rape and sexual assault of the appellant's two daughters. In......
  • DPP v R.K.
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 7 Julio 2016
    ...here are very significantly out of line. 14 Attention is drawn to the case of The People(Director of Public Prosecutions) v. L.D. [2014] IECA 53. There, the accused had pleaded not guilty but had been convicted in respect of 30 counts of sexual offences, including 19 rape counts which had o......
  • DPP v T.v (No. 2)
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 7 Diciembre 2017
    ...of a similar nature were imposed or upheld in a number of cases in relatively recent times including DPP v. FG [2014] IECA42, DPP v. LD [2014] IECA 53, DPP v. Griffin [2011] 1 IECCA 62 and DPP v. SP [2009] IECCA, to mention but a few. 13 Mr. Bowman S.C. (for the appellant) is critical of th......
  • DPP v Joseph McGrane
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 26 Noviembre 2020
    ...in respect of various charges of rape and sexual assault against two victims. 18 The appellant further refers to The People (DPP) v. LD [2014] IECA 53. Here a sentence of fifteen years with three years suspended was imposed in respect of 24 counts of rape and six counts of indecent assault ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT