DPP v Spratt

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Finnegan J.
• Judgment Date: 10 December 2007
• Neutral Citation: [2007] IECCA 123
• Docket Number: 101CJA/07
• Court: Court of Criminal Appeal
• Date: 10 December 2007

[2007] IECCA 123

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

Finnegan J.

Murphy J.

de Valera J.

101CJA/07

DPP v Spratt

IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 2 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1993

THE PEOPLE (AT THE SUIT OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS)

.v.

DAVID SPRATT

RESPONDENT

MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT 1977 S15A

MISUSE OF DRUGS ACT 1984 S6

1 Judgment of the Court (ex tempore) delivered on the 10th day of December 2007 by Finnegan J.

Finnegan J.

2 In this case the respondent is charged under section 15 A of the Misuse of Drugs Act1977 as amended by section 6 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1984 as having drugs for the purpose of sale or supply, the drug in question being cocaine. He was sentenced on the 16^th April 2007 to five years but with that term suspended.

3 The circumstances are that on the 27^th January 2007 at 6 p.m. in the evening pursuant to a search warrant the respondent's home at Meadowbrook Park, Baldoyle, was searched by the Gardai. He was co-operative. He pointed out where they would find cocaine. In fact three bags of cocaine were found containing 492.266 grams and the Garda evidence of market value was €34, 458. Another way of looking at the value of the drugs perhaps is that they cost him €16, 000 and the intention was to sell them for about €18, 000. In any event it was quite clear that the amount of drugs involved, be it at the top or bottom valuation or somewhere in between, exceeds the amount stipulated by section 15A.

4 The respondent is 21 years of age. As his hobby he plays soccer. He lives with his father and mother, his older sister and younger brother. He has a good family. He had his difficulties at school. He was expelled before the junior certificate but allowed back. There is clear evidence that he had learning difficulties but in fact having left school he went on to complete his education. He is now an apprentice plumber and is some way into his apprenticeship. One of the sad features of this case is that a term in prison may well disrupt his ultimate qualification but if that is the consequence of his actions so be it.

5 In fixing the appropriate sentence in this case the court has regard first of all to the maximum sentence, which is one of life imprisonment, and the statutory minimum sentence of ten years. Looking at the sentence often years the court must then see if it would be unjust to impose that sentence in the circumstances of this case. Regard is had first of all to the circumstance that he was immediately co-operative, made immediate admissions and pleaded guilty at the earliest possible time and that counts very much in his favour. He was co-operative with the Gardai to the extent that he felt he could be and was not fully co-operative only insofar as he was prevented from being so by fear.

6 Taking these circumstances into account and taking into account the value of the drugs in question and the nature of the drugs in question it is then necessary to look at the appropriate...