Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Hamisi Salum Muejori v. R., Crim. App. 854-D-67, 6/12/67, Biron J.



Hamisi Salum Muejori v. R., Crim. App. 854-D-67, 6/12/67, Biron J.

Accused was convicted of giving false information to a person employed in the public service, and of obtaining by false pretences Shs. 27/60. The trial court, noting that the accused “has proved impervious to former sentences” and that he was an ”incorrigible criminal,” gave him sentences of five months and two years, respectively, to run concurrently.

            Held: “Whilst previous convictions are certainly a relevant factor in the assessment of punishment, in that they disentitle an accused to any claim of leniency, the determining factor in the assessment of punishment is the intrinsic offence which has been committed.” It is not “ethical or just” to punish a man over and over again for previous offences. While accused deserves no leniency, the offences of which he stands convicted were trivial. Sentence on second count reduced to five months.

  

Post a Comment

0 Comments