Daniel Sinsirimwezi v. R., Crim. App. 786-D-67, 22/11/67, Duff J.
Accused was charged with house-breaking and stealing goods worth Shs. 149/- Upon proof that one of the stolen items, a patched shirt, had been found in accused ‘s possession, the magistrate convicted him of receiving stolen goods, invoking the doctrine of recent possession The magistrate felt obliged to impose the minimum sentence of 2 years and 24 strokes, since the value of the property involved in the charge exceeded Shs. 100/-.
Held: Notwithstanding the charge, the magistrate should base the sentence upon the value of the goods actually shown to have been received by accused . As this was clearly less than Shs. 100/-, the magistrate should have applied section 5(2) and permitted the accused to adduce any “special circumstances” which might warrant leniency. Record returned for such hearing.
0 Comments
PLACE YOUR COMMENT HERE
WARNING: DO NOT USE ABUSIVE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.
THE COMMENTS OF OUR READERS IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY.