Sentencing judge failed to record what actual discount was applied for mitigation

Criminal law – sentencing – appeal of severity of six years’ imprisonment imposed for offences of delivery of counterfeit currency and having custody or control of materials or implements for the purpose of counterfeiting currency – s.34 (1)(b) and (3) of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001 – s.36 (1) and (3) of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001 – whether the sentence imposed was disproportionate, and that insufficient allowance had been made for all the mitigating factors – Thomas O’Malley in Sentencing , 2nd edition – trial judge’s reasons are insufficiently detailed – sentencing judge erred both in failing to record what actual discount she was applying for mitigation, thereby giving rise to a justifiable concern that she may have not have afforded sufficient discount for mitigation - also failed to give an adequate overall explanation of the rationale for the sentence she in fact imposed – appeal allowed.