DPP v McCormack

JudgeBarron J.
Judgment Date10 April 2000
Neutral Citation2000 WJSC-CCA 3024
Docket Number116/99 718 CJA/99,[C.C.A. Nos. 116 and
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeal
Date10 April 2000

2000 WJSC-CCA 3024

Barron J.

Budd J.

Kearns J.

116/99 718 CJA/99



Criminal Law

Sexual assault; sentencing; appellant had been convicted of aggravated sexual assault and attempted rape and had been sentenced to three years imprisonment with the last two years unconditionally suspended; appellant appealing against sentence and Director also appealing on the grounds that such sentence is unduly lenient; whether a custodial sentence is mandatory in the absence of a statutory direction to that effect; whether, having regard to the mitigating factors in the case, a custodial sentence was required in the instant case.

Held: Appeal allowed; appeal by D.P.P. refused.

D.P.P. v. McCormack - CCA: Barron J. - 10/04/2000 - [2000] 4 IR 356

The appellant had received two three year sentences in respect of a sexual assault charge and an attempted rape charge. Both sentences were to run concurrently and the last two years were unconditionally suspended. The victim did not wish a custodial sentence to be imposed and made representations to this effect. The trial judge had certified that the case was a fit case for appeal in relation to the imposition of sentence. The appellant appealed against the sentences imposed while the Director of Public Prosecutions cross-appealed on the grounds that the sentences were unduly lenient. Barron J, delivering judgment, held that there were a number of mitigating factors present. Both the probation report and psychiatric evidence were favourable to the accused. In view of the circumstances a custodial sentence was not appropriate. The appeal of the appellant was therefore allowed and the cross-appeal of the Director of Public Prosecutions was dismissed.


Judgment of the Court delivered on 10th day of April 2000 by Barron J.


This is an appeal by the appellant against sentences of three years imprisonment upon a count of aggravated sexual assault and one of attempted rape both to run concurrently and with the last two years unconditionally suspended. There is also a cross-appeal by the Director of Public Prosecutions upon the ground that such sentence is unduly lenient.


The events leading to the prosecution occurred in the early hours of the morning of the 21st June, 1997. They took place in a county town. Both parties had attended a disco in a local hotel. The appellant who had attained his seventeenth birthday some two weeks before went to the disco with male friends from work who were roughly ten years his senior. The victim of the assault was approaching her twenty-second birthday and had gone to the disco with some female friends. They met at the disco and had not previously known each other.


They were obviously attracted to each other. The appellant had had more to drink than was good for him and it is likely that the conduct of the victim was influenced by a similar cause. In any event, they engaged in mild intimacies on the dance floor. They went outside where these intimacies increased in character. They were told to leave the premises and after they had done so, it was said by the appellant's counsel that the evidence which would have been given at a trial indicated that their conduct continued and in fact drew a crowd.


They then went to a secluded area where the offences took place. At some stage, the victim had asked the appellant whether he had a contraceptive. He had. She did so expecting that he did not and in order to let him know that she did not want sex. This, however, led him to think the opposite and when she later made it clear that she did not want sex, he lost his temper, said he would kill her and hit her around the face. He also forced her to take off most of her clothes. However, although he did try he was physiologically unable to have sex. She was able to run away and clothed only in her...

To continue reading

Request your trial
159 cases
  • DPP v TMcD
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 25 Febrero 2020
    ...accordingly access his culpability as of that time.” 7 The appellant also refers to the following cases: The People (DPP) v. McCormack [2000] 4 IR 356, where the Court of Criminal Appeal allowed a severity appeal of a sentence of three years' imprisonment with the final two years unconditi......
  • DPP v Wayne O'Donoghue
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • 18 Octubre 2006
    ...CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1993 S2 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1964 S4 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1993 S2(3) DPP v BYRNE 1995 1 ILRM 279 DPP v MCCORMACK 2000 4 IR 356 DPP v AHERNE UNREP CCA 5.7.2004 2004/14/3197 DPP v BAMBRICK 1996 1 IR 265 DPP v MACKEY 2005 1 ILRM 481 DPP v GILLIGAN 2004 3 IR 87 CRIMINAL ......
  • DPP v Purse
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 22 Julio 2019
    ...and the sentences will date from the… the 3rd of May, 2017’. Discussion 19 As was stated in The People (DPP) v. McCormack [2000] 4 I.R. 356 where at p. 357 it provides: - ‘Each case must depend upon its special circumstances. The appropriate sentence depends not only upon its own facts but......
  • DPP v Redmond
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • 29 Marzo 2001
    ...v. Hughes (Unreported, Court of Criminal Appeal, 27th March, 2000). The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v. McCormack [2000] 4 I.R. 356. The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v. Moloney (Unreported, Court of Criminal Appeal, 2nd March, 1992). The State v. Judge Roe [1985] 1 I......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 books & journal articles
  • Sentencing Rape - A Comparative Analysis by Dr Graeme Brown
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal No. 2-20, July 2020
    • 1 Julio 2020
    ...– A Practical Perspective’ (2008) 4 Criminal Law Review 277. 27 The People ( Director of Public Prosecutions) v Thomas McCormack [2000] 4 I.R. 356. [2020] Irish Judicial Studies Journal Vol 4(2) 212 IRISH JUDICIAL STUDIES JOURNAL 212 Act 2009. An important change here was that the court’s d......
  • Sentencing Methodology - Towards Improved Reasoning In Sentencing
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal No. 1-19, January 2019
    • 1 Enero 2019
    ...People (DPP) v WC [1994] 1 ILRM 321 (HC) 325 concerning proportionality in sentencing. 7[1994] 3 IR 593 (SC). 8People (DPP) v McCormack [2000] 4 IR 356 (CCA) 359. 9Examples include People (DPP) v O’Driscoll (1972) 1 Frewen 351; People (DPP) v Kelly [2004] IECCA 14, [2005] 2 IR 321. 10Exampl......
  • An analysis of sentencing provisions in the criminal justice act, 2006
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal No. 1-7, January 2007
    • 1 Enero 2007
    ...Appeal, unreported, Hardiman J., 5 July 2004, The People (D.P.P.) v. Redmond [2001] 3 I.R. 390 (S.C.); The People (D.P.P.) v. McCormack [2000] 4 I.R. 356; The People (D.P.P.) v. Sheedy [2000] 2 I.R. 184; The People (D.P.P.) v. M. [1994] 3 I.R. 306 (S.C.); The People (D.P.P.) v. W.C. [1994] ......
  • A Critical Analysis Of The Many Manifestations Of The Criminal Justice System And The Principles That Underlie The Current Irish System
    • Ireland
    • Cork Online Law Review No. 7-2008, January 2008
    • 1 Enero 2008
    ...rate. 31Law Reform Commission, Report on Sentencing LRC 53-1996 (Law Reform Commission Dublin 1996) 2.34. 32[1976] IR 325, 353. 33[2000] 4 IR 356. 34[1994] IRLM 35[2002] 4 IR 309. 36T Healy and D McDonald ‘Top Judge Rebuked by Court of Criminal Appeal Over Rape Case Court Remarks’ The Irish......
  • 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