THE COURT of Criminal Appeal has refused the DPP’s application to increase jail sentences of a maximum two years imposed on six men for their role in a riot at St Patrick’s Institution on St Stephen’s Day 2005.
The three-judge appeal court ruled that, while the sentences imposed on the six were “seriously inadequate”, it would be unjust to interfere with them now due to factors including the passage of time and because two are no longer in custody.
The six – Gary Hanley, North Clarence Street, Dublin; Jonathan Donovan, O’Devaney Gardens, Dublin; Leonard Dumbrell, Emmet Road, Inchicore; Noel Hudson, Sean O’Casey Avenue, Dublin; Jason Brady, Moatview Avenue, Priorswood, Dublin; and Charles Darcy, Crumlin Park, Crumlin – had pleaded guilty last year to violent disorder at the centre for young offenders.
The six were jailed for terms of between two and three years, with the final 12 months suspended in the case of all sentences. The DPP appealed the sentences on grounds of undue leniency.
Yesterday, the CCA, with Mr Justice Joseph Finnegan presiding, and sitting with Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne and Mr Justice John Edwards, dismissed the appeal.
The court noted the six had between them a very significant record of offending and were all involved in a sequence of events, although not at the same time, after a riot broke out at about 5.30pm on St Stephen’s Day 2005.
A number of prison officers were injured during the riot, which started after inmates were spotted interfering with a fence in the exercise yard. The six were not the only inmates involved in the riot.
Mr Justice Finnegan said violent disorder was a very significant and serious offence with a maximum sentence of 10 years.
He said the CCA believed the sentences imposed were “very seriously inadequate” and failed to reflect the significant fact the violent disorder “took place within the prison system” and exposed prison officers “to serious risk.” Judge Ryan was incorrect to backdate the sentences, he said.
However, it would be impossible to do justice if the CCA was at this stage to interfere with the sentences, the judge said. This was because of factors including the passage of time since the offences and because two of the six men were no longer in custody.
The CCA also said Judge Ryan, before passing sentence, had not been given necessary information, including the dates on which some of the six were due to complete their sentences. This lack of information had not helped the judge.