Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Musa s/o Bakari v. R., Crim. App. 37-D-68, 24/4/68, Biron J.



Musa s/o Bakari v. R., Crim. App. 37-D-68, 24/4/68, Biron J.

Accused was convicted of stealing [P.C. s. 265] and housebreaking [P.C. s. 294(1)], and given consecutive sentences of good reason to the contrary, to order the sentences for the related offences of housebreaking and stealing to run concurrently with each other. The fact that the appellant had a previous conviction for theft – whereon, incidentally, he was sentenced to imprisonment for eight month --- does not constitute such good reason to justify a departure from the general practice. The order that the two sentences are to run consecutively to each other is accordingly set aside and there is substituted there for an order that the two sentences are to run concurrently with each other.” 

Post a Comment

0 Comments