DPP v Maughan

JurisdictionIreland
CourtCourt of Appeal (Ireland)
JudgeMr. Justice Mahon
Judgment Date21 April 2016
Neutral Citation[2016] IECA 127
Docket NumberAppeal No.: 186/14
Date21 April 2016

Sheehan J.

Mahon J.

Edwards J.

Between
The People at the Suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
- and -
Eamon Maughan
Appellant

[2016] IECA 127

Appeal No.: 186/14

THE COURT OF APPEAL

Sentencing ? Assault causing harm ? Severity of sentence ? Appellant seeking to appeal against sentence ? Whether sentence was excessive and disproportionate

Facts: The appellant, Mr Maughan, on 8th June 2013, contravened a Safety Order contrary to 2. 17(1) of the Domestic Violence Act 1996 and assaulted his wife. On that date the appellant arrived home and demanded money from his wife with which to gamble. Mrs Maughan did not give him money and he proceeded to beat her with a handle of a brush about her head, hitting her four or five times. He then left the house. Mrs Maughan called the Gardaí and made a statement in relation to the assault. On 17th June 2013 the appellant threatened to kill his wife with a carpet knife. Mrs Maughan made a statement to the Gardaí in which she provided details of the threat. At the time Mrs Maughan was in bed with two of her young children. She described to the Gardaí how the appellant shouted at her and warned her to?drop the charges or he would kill her.? She told the Gardaí that she was in serious fear for her life. On 2nd February 2014 at the conclusion of a three day jury trial, the appellant was found guilty of four counts, being: 1) threat to kill or cause serious harm contrary to s. 5 of the Non Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997; 2) assault causing harm contrary to s. 3 of the?1997 Act; 3) intimidation of a witness contrary to s. 41(1) and (5) of the Criminal Justice Act 1999; and 4) contravention of a Safety Order contrary to s. 17(1) of the Domestic Violence Act 1996. On 4th April 2014 Castlebar Circuit Criminal Court imposed prison sentences of three years to date from 6th November 2013 in respect of count 1, two years in respect of count 2 to run consecutively with the sentence imposed on count 1, and three years in respect of count 3 to run concurrently with the sentence imposed on count 1. Count 4 was taken into consideration with counts 1, 2 and 3. The appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal against that sentence on the grounds that: (i) the effective overall sentence of five years was excessive and disproportionate, and amounted to an error in principle; (ii) insufficient weight was attached to the mitigating factors; (iii) it was wrong to treat as an aggravating factor the appellant?s lack of remorse in relation to the commission of the offences; and (iv) insufficient weight was attached to the appellant?s family and personal circumstances.

Held by Mahon J that he was satisfied that in respect of counts 1 and 3 no error of principle was evident in the sentences imposed. In relation to count 2, Mahon J held that it was necessarily made consecutive to the three year sentence imposed in respect of count 1 as it was an offence committed while the appellant was on bail for that first offence. The court found no fault with the sentencing judge?s view that the appropriate sentence for that offence was one of five years imprisonment. In deciding, however, to impose just two years imprisonment for that offence, Mahon J held that it was quite apparent that the sentencing judge very fully respected and acknowledged the principle of proportionality and totality, almost to the point of leniency. Mahon J found that there was no error of principle evident in the imposition of that sentence.

Mahon J held that the appeal should be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Judgment (ex tempore) delivered on 21st day of April 2016 by Mr. Justice Mahon
1

This is an appeal against a sentence imposed on 4th April 2014 at Castlebar Circuit Criminal Court following conviction on 2nd February 2014 at the conclusion of a three day jury trial.

2

The appellant was found guilty of four counts, being:-

(i) Count No. 1:

Threat to kill or cause serious harm contrary to s. 5 of the Non Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997. (In respect of this offence the appellant received a prison sentence of three years, to date from 6th November 2013).

(ii) Count No. 2:

Assault causing harm contrary to s. 3 of the Non Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997. (In respect of this offence the appellant was sentenced to two years, sentence to run consecutively with the sentence imposed on count no. 1 and concurrently with the sentence imposed in count no. 2).

(iii) Count No. 3:

Intimidation of a witness contrary to s. 41(1) and (5) of the Criminal Justice Act 1999. (In respect of this offence the appellant was sentenced to three years imprisonment, sentence to run concurrently with the sentence imposed on count no. 1).

(iv) Count No. 4:

Contravention of Safety Order contrary to s. 17(1) of the Domestic Violence Act 1996. (This offence was taken into consideration with counts 1, 2 and 3).

3

On 8th June 2013 the appellant contravened a Safety Order contrary to 2. 17(1) of the Domestic Violence Act 1996 and assaulted his wife, Ann Maughan. The appellant and his wife lived together with their seven children. On that date the appellant arrived home and demanded money from his wife with which to gamble. Mrs. Maughan did not give him money and he proceeded to beat her with a handle of a brush about her head, hitting her four or five times. She was bleeding from a cut to her head. He then left the house. Mrs. Maughan called the gardaí and made a statement in relation to the...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
4 cases
  • Director of Public Prosecutions v J.D.
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 18 December 2023
    ...IECA 97; The People (DPP) v Jervis & Doyle [2014] IECCA 14; The People (DPP) v McElligott [2008] IECCA 146; The People (DPP) v Maughan [2016] IECA 127; The People (DPP) v Counihan [2015] IECA 76; The People (DPP) v McKenna [2019] IECA 170; The People (DPP) v M O'N [2018] IECA 305 and The Pe......
  • DPP v Sidney Sutton
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 25 September 2020
    ...as a father. 44 The relevance of an accused role as father in the context of domestic violence incidents was addressed in DPP v. Maughan [2016] IECA 127 wherein Mahon J. stated as follows: “12. One of the submissions made by counsel for the appellant was that the sentencing judge did not su......
  • DPP v Kane
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 30 March 2023
    ...34 It is noted that during her sentencing remarks, the sentencing judge referred to the decision of Mahon J in People (DPP) v Maughan [2016] IECA 127, in which case, the sentence imposed in respect of intimidation was one of 3 years' imprisonment in circumstances where the intimidation invo......
  • The Director of Public Prosecutions v Brady
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 31 July 2026
    ...intimidation is 15 years, whereas the maximum penalty on the present offences is life imprisonment. 21 In The People (DPP) v. Maughan [2016] IECA 127, a sentence of three years' imprisonment was imposed on a charge of intimidation of a witness (the wife of the appellant); the offence was on......