DPP v Mindadze

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Sheehan
• Judgment Date: 27 October 2016
• Neutral Citation: [2016] IECA 337
• Docket Number: 288/15
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)
• Date: 27 October 2016

[2016] IECA 337

THE COURT OF APPEAL

Sheehan J.

Birmingham J.

Sheehan J.

Mahon J.

288/15

The People at the Suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

V

Archili Mindadze

Appellant

Sentencing – Assault causing harm – Mitigating factors – Appellant seeking to appeal against sentence – Whether trial judge gave adequate credit for mitigation

Facts: The appellant, Mr Mindadze, pleaded guilty to assault causing harm to Mr Borta, a dentist, at his practice in Summerhill Parade, Dublin on the 1st November, 2012, and received a sentence of three and a half years imprisonment with the final six months of that sentence suspended on the usual terms. The appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal against that sentence. Counsel for the appellant contended that the trial judge started at too high a point by identifying three and a half years imprisonment as the appropriate headline sentence. Counsel for the appellant also contended that the trial judge did not give his client adequate credit for mitigation. In support of his argument he relied on three judgments of the Court of Appeal, namely DPP v McDonald [2016] IECA 246, DPP v Smyth [2016] IECA 199 and DPP v Irwin [2016] IECA 76. Counsel for the respondent, the DPP, rejected these submissions and placed emphasis on the fact that the assault took place in the context of an attempted extortion.

Held by Sheehan J that the trial judge was entirely justified in identifying three and a half years imprisonment as the appropriate starting point particularly in view of the background to the assault. Sheehan J noted that the offence of demanding money with menaces carries a maximum sentence of ten years imprisonment and he also noted that having committed the assault in this case, the appellant returned to the injured party’s dental practice ten days later in accordance with the threat he had issued at the time of the assault. Sheehan J noted that the cooperation given by the appellant to the Gardaí was limited and that the plea of guilty was entered on the morning of the trial. In Sheehan J’s view the mitigation afforded in respect of these factors was adequate.

Sheehan J held that he would dismiss the appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT of the Court (ex tempore) delivered on the 27th day of October 2016 by Mr. Justice Sheehan

1 This is an appeal against sentence.

2 The appellant pleaded guilty to assault causing harm to Iurii Borta a Romanian dentist at his practice in Summerhill Parade, Dublin on the 1st November, 2012, and received a sentence of three and a half years imprisonment with the final six months of that sentence suspended on the usual terms.

3 The plea of guilty which was entered on the day of trial was accepted by the Director of Public Prosecutions on the basis that two other counts be taken into consideration namely count 2, which charged the appellant with demanding money with menaces contrary to s. 17 of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994, as amended, and count 3 which charged the appellant with...