View/Open - CORA - University College Cork

By combining a period of custody with a period of supervision of sentence, classical
sentencing norms of desert are combined with crime prevention measures of social control
and behavioural change. However, O’Malleycriticises the part-suspended sentence on the
grounds that it offends against the principle of proportionality. He asks “if an offence
merits ten years imprisonment, why should the last six be suspended on review?
(O’Malley 2000:294). As noted in the previous chapter, the suspended sentence and the
part suspended sentence are both open to the viscissitudes of sentencing inflation and net
widening in practice. A governing principle such as that given in O’Keefe has not been
formally pronounced for the suspended sentence in Ireland. But besides the issue of
proportionality involved, it is also likely that more than one sentencing rationale is
deployed by Irish sentencers when considering suspended sentences in general and part-
suspended sentences in particular. Although O’Malley advocates the necessity of the
O’Keefe principles, the writer contends that the operation of the suspended sentence in
Ireland is essentially unfettered by such an approach with crime prevention measures
playing an equallyprominent role in the admixture of sentencing considerations in addition
to issues of proportionality. Thus, the practice of imposing suspended sentences and part-
suspended sentences may offend against a central tenet of Irish sentencing law in certain
cases where control of the offender bya threat of imprisonment is disproportionate to the
maximum penalty necessary to secure compliance by him/her. Moreover, the same
criticism which O’Malley makes against the part-suspended sentence might equally be
levied against the wholly suspended sentence by applying the same O’Keefe principles. If
the offence is sufficiently serious and the circumstances of the offender are such that all
non-custodial sentencing options should not be used and the court is firmly of the view
that a custodial sentence is warranted as prescribed in O’Keefe and MahWing (1983)
5Cr.App.R.(s) 346), the principle of proportionality is equally breached if the court
suspends the entirety of the sentence and does not require the convicted person to serve
one dayof saya three year sentence of imprisonment.
Court full sentence of imprisonment 90, partially suspended sentence 55). Note wholly suspended sentences are not counted in these figures. The part
suspended sentence was hidden within the full custodial sentence. In the Central Criminal Court for the year 2006 a total of 115 cases were dealt with. Of
these 85 resulted in convictions. Of these 20 received mandatory sentences. Of the remainder (65), 6 were wholly suspended and 28 partially suspended.
Accordingly, 47.45% of all discretionary sentences of imprisonment in the Central Criminal Court for 2006 were partially suspended. (Personal Surveys and
Communications with Mr. LiamConvey, Registrar -28th December 2007).
283