Good behaviour record held not to be a factor

The Supreme Court has declared that matters relating to the reintegration of offenders into society are best handled by the Executive.

In a decision with implications for appeals against severity of sentence, the five-judge court dismissed an appeal by a Dublin man against a five-year sentence imposed on forgery charges and upheld a decision by the Court of Criminal Appeal that it could not consider, when hearing Francis Cunningham's appeal against sentence, evidence relating to his good behaviour in prison.

The judges were deciding questions of law arising from Cunnigham's appeal to the CCA against severity of sentence.

Evidence relating to good behaviour could only be considered if and when the CCA allowed the appeal against severity of sentence and quashed the original sentence, Mr Justice Hardiman said.

In those circumstances, the CCA might then substitute an appropriate sentence of its own. In doing so, it was entitled to consider all relevant factors then existing and properly before it, including matters arising after the original sentence.

He said matters relating to the reintegration of offenders into society were best dealt with, and could only be dealt with, by the Executive.

While it was true that, in a number of other cases, the CCA had appeared to take into account matters arising after sentencing, it was not apparent to him that the CCA had jurisdiction to do so.

The Chief Justcie, Mr Justice Keane, Mr Justice Murphy and Mr Justice Murray all agreed with the judgment of Mr Justice Hardiman.

In a separate judgment, Mrs Justice Denham said the CCA had a specific statutory mandate "to do justice" in a case.

It was for the CCA to determine what constituted justice in the case before it, and that issue was not a matter for another institution of State.