COURT UPHOLDS APPEAL BY DPP

An appeal by the Director of Public Prosecutions against an "unduly lenient"
court decision to suspend sentences on two men was upheld yesterday.

Mr Justice Murphy said a revolutionary change introduced by Section Two of
the Criminal Justice Act of 1993 may put an end to pre-trial discussions
between a judge and counsel for the DPP and an accused, or it may mean they
take a different form.

Counsel must in future recognise that any sentence imposed by a trial
judge - or any sentence which it is anticipated may be imposed - would be
subject to review by the Court of Criminal Appeal so that any course of
action taken by an accused must have regard to that legal reality.

The three-judge Court of Criminal Appeal ordered yesterday that jail
sentences imposed on two Dublin men, which had been suspended, will now have
to be served. The decision of the Circuit Criminal Court to suspend the
sentences of six years and four years had been appealed by the DPP. It was
submitted that suspending the sentences was unduly lenient.

Kieran Cox (49), Cherry Orchard Avenue, Ballyfermot, had been given a
six-year suspended sentence and Anthony Keeler (35), of Rossmore Drive,
Ballyfermot, had been given a four-year suspended sentence. When the case
was before the Circuit Criminal Court in November 1997, the sentences were
suspended on the two men entering bonds to be of good behaviour.

The men had been charged on a number of counts of handling stolen property
valued in excess of IEP100,000 following a Garda raid on a warehouse or shed
at Bay Lane, Mulhuddart in August 1993.

A Garda superintendent gave evidence in the Circuit Criminal Court that
items discovered included a tractor unit, a substantial goods container,
which did contain or had contained the household goods and personal effects
stolen from Ambassador Mr Brendan Scannell, as well as motor vehicles and
other property.

Giving the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal yesterday, Mr Justice
Murphy said the two men were tried in due course. They pleaded not guilty
and were convicted. They appealed their sentences to the Court of Criminal
Appeal and were allowed bail. Their conviction was quashed. On the retrial,
they pleaded guilty and were convicted.

The Court of Criminal Appeal proposed to impose the sentences but to direct
that the matter be reentered before the Circuit Court judge after the men
had served a year of their term.

That procedure would enable the judge to consider whether there were facts
at that stage, or on any subsequent review, which would justify the optimism
and humanity which he had expressed - prematurely in the view of the Court
of Criminal Appeal - in imposing the two suspended sentences.

Checked-by: Don Beck