DPP v Mervin White
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Court | Court of Criminal Appeal |
Judge | Denham J. |
Judgment Date | 09 November 2009 |
Neutral Citation | [2009] IECCA 126 |
Date | 09 November 2009 |
[2009] IECCA 126
THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
Denham J.
Herbert J.
Clarke J.
and
CRIMINAL JUSTICE (THEFT & FRAUD OFFENCES) ACT 2001 S14
CRIMINAL LAW ACT 1997 S7(2)
CRIMINAL JUSTICE (THEFT & FRAUD OFFENCES) ACT 2001 S13
CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1984 S11
CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1984 S11(1)
DPP v YUSUF 2008 4 IR 204 2008/21/4689 2008 IECCA 37
CRIMINAL LAW
Sentence
Severity - Consecutive sentences - Multiple theft and fraud offences - Significant violence threatened - Interpretation of provisions of statute - Whether error in principle in interpretation - Whether trial judge erred in principle - Whether consecutive sentences appropriate - People (DPP) v Yusuf [2008] IECCA 37 [2008] 4 IR 204 applied - Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001 (No 50), ss 13 and 14 - Criminal Justice Act 1984 (No 22) ss 11 - Appeal allowed, sentence reduced with conditions (124/2008 - CCA - 9/11/2009) [2009] IECCA 126
People (DPP) v White
Facts The appellant was sentenced to a total of 13 years imprisonment with last three years suspended for robbery related offences and destruction of evidence. There was significant violence involved in the crimes except the destruction of evidence. The sentences imposed for the charges ran consecutively. The appeal turned on the interpretation of section 11 (1) of the Criminal Justice Act, 1984 on whether consecutive sentences apply to every offence committed while on bail.
Held by the Court of Criminal Appeal (Denham J; Herbert and Clarke JJ) in finding the trial judge erred in principle in the interpretation of the section. The trial judge imposed consecutive sentences on each offence. The court amended the sentences to a total of 10 years.
People (DPP) v Yusuf [2004] 4 IR 204 referred to.
Reporter: BD
9th day of November, 2009, by Denham J.
1. This is an application for leave to appeal by Mervin White, the applicant, referred to in this judgment as "the applicant", against the severity of sentence.
2. The applicant was sentenced to thirteen years imprisonment, with the final three years suspended by the Dublin Circuit (Criminal) Court on the 20 th December, 2007.
3. There were six criminal incidents, being four robberies, one aggravated burglary and one incident of destroying evidence. These offences took place in 2006. There were six separate bills:-
(i) 1277/2006 - an offence of robbery contrary to s.14 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001, at Maxworth Supermarket in Corduff on the 27 th May, 2006.
(ii) 362/2007 - an offence of destroying evidence, contrary to s.7(2) of the Criminal Law Act, 1997, on the 20 th August, 2006.
(iii) 84/2007 - an offence of aggravated burglary, contrary to s. 13 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001, at Mulhuddart on the 21 st August, 2006.
(iv) 941/2007 - an offence of robbery, contrary to s.14 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001, at Movies 4 U 2 C on the 3 rd September, 2006.
(v) 254/2007 - two offences of robbery, contrary to s. 14 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001, in the context of the same incident at Superquinn, Tyrellstown on the 12 th September, 2006.
(vi) 119/2007 - an offence of robbery contrary to s.14 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001, and a contemporaneous offence of production of a knife at Molloy's Liquor, Clonsilla, on the 6 th October, 2006.
4. The applicant was sentenced on the 20 th December, 2007, on the six bills as follows:-
(i) 1277/2006 - 3 years imprisonment
(ii) 362/2007 - 1 year imprisonment consecutive to Bill No. 1277/2006
(iii) 84/2007 - 4 years imprisonment consecutive to Bill No. 1277/2006
(iv) 941/2007 - 3 years imprisonment consecutive to Bill No. 84/2007
(v) 254/2007 - (on both counts) 3 years imprisonment consecutive to Bill No. 84/2007 with 2 years suspended on condition
(vi) 119/2007 - 3 years imprisonment consecutive to Bill No. 254/2007 and suspended in full for 5 years, on conditions.
5. Evidence was given by members of An Garda Síochána in relation to each bill. There was significant violence threatened in all except the count relating to the destruction of evidence.
6. The case raises the issue of consecutive sentences under s.11 of the Criminal...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
DPP v Beatty
... 2000 4 IR 356 2000/8/3024 DPP v KAVANAGH UNREP CCA 24.7.2008 2008/19/4062 2008 IECCA 100 DPP v WHITE UNREP CCA 9.11.2009 2009/19/4704 2009 IECCA 126 MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT 1977 S5 MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT 1977 S27 MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT 1977 S27(3) MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT 1977 S28 DPP v M 1994 3 IR 306 ......