|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| September 2021 |
|
|
Appellate court reduced an excessive cumulative six-year sentence for multiple thefts to shorter consecutive terms.
Criminal law – Sentencing – appellate interference with discretionary sentence – manifestly excessive or miscarriage of justice; Consecutive sentences – Magistrates Courts Act s.192(1); aggregate treatment on appeal – Trial on Indictments Act s.2(3); mitigating factors – guilty plea, first offender status, value of property.
|
23 September 2021 |
|
Appellate court reduced excessive cumulative consecutive sentence, confirming one term and reducing two others while keeping them consecutive.
* Criminal law – Sentencing – Discretion of trial court – Appellate interference only where sentence is unlawful, manifestly excessive or wrong in principle.
* Statutory default – Consecutive sentences – Section 192(1) Magistrates Courts Act; aggregation of consecutive sentences for appeal.
* Mitigation – Guilty plea and first offender status as factors in reducing sentence.
* Sentence revision – Confirmation and reduction of individual terms while preserving consecutiveness.
|
23 September 2021 |
|
Appellate court reduced cumulative six-year sentence for three theft convictions as manifestly excessive, revising two terms to 1.5 years.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Appellate interference with sentencing discretion – Consecutive sentences – Treatment of aggregate sentence on appeal – Factors: guilty plea, first offender status, value of stolen property.
|
23 September 2021 |
|
Appellate court reduced cumulative consecutive sentences as excessive, confirming one term and reducing two others while keeping them consecutive.
* Criminal law – Sentencing – Consecutive sentences – Default rule that sentences run consecutively (Magistrates Courts Act s192(1)). * Appeal – Interference with sentencing discretion – Only where sentence is manifestly excessive/lenient, wrong in principle, or relevant factors ignored (Kiwalabye principle). * Trial on Indictments Act s2(3) – Aggregation of consecutive sentences for appeal purposes. * Mitigation – weight of guilty plea and first‑offender status in sentencing.
|
23 September 2021 |
|
Medical evidence of penetration without corroboration linking the juvenile to the acts failed to establish a prima facie case.
* Criminal law – Aggravated defilement – elements: victim under 14, sexual act, participation by accused.
* Procedure – Trial on Indictments Act s.73(1) – test for prima facie case at close of prosecution.
* Evidence – unsworn child testimony requires corroboration to establish accused’s participation.
* Forensic evidence of penetration, without corroborative linkage to accused, insufficient to sustain conviction.
|
21 September 2021 |
|
Insufficient corroboration of unsworn child testimony led to acquittal for lack of prima facie case.
Criminal law – Aggravated defilement; s.73 Trial on Indictments Act – prima facie test; unsworn child evidence and requirement of corroboration; medical evidence proves sexual act but not identity/participation; standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
|
21 September 2021 |
|
A child remanded beyond the Children Act’s three-month limit must be considered for bail with appropriate safeguards.
Children Act – s90 and s91(5) – mandatory maximum remand of three months for a child charged with an offence punishable by death; constitutional right to apply for bail; presumption in favour of release of children; safeguards on release – court bond sureties, Registrar’s examination, probation and social welfare inquiry.
|
19 September 2021 |
|
A child remanded beyond the Children Act’s three-month limit for a death-eligible offence must be released on bail with safeguards.
- Children Act – remand of child charged with death-eligible offence – mandatory maximum remand of three months per s.91(5);
- Bail – constitutional right to apply for bail (Art.23(6)(a)) and paramountcy of avoiding institutional detention for children;
- Conditions for juvenile bail – own recognisance, sureties on court bond (not cash), registrar examination, probation and social welfare inquiry and report.
|
19 September 2021 |
|
A child charged with a capital offence remanded beyond the statutory three-month limit must be considered for bail with safeguards.
Children Act – Bail and remand limits for children charged with capital offences; mandatory three-month remand ceiling; bail on recognisance; safeguards of sureties, Registrar examination and Probation/Social Welfare inquiry.
|
19 September 2021 |
|
Remand exceeding 120 days is unreasonable detention; High Court may order release on appropriate non-cash bail and bonded sureties.
Human Rights (Enforcement) Act s.15 — unreasonable detention — remand exceeding 120 days; Constitution art.23(6)(b) — mandatory bail with reasonable conditions; Magistrates Courts Act s.75(4)(a)/s.76 — High Court power to vary bail; bail conditions — cash versus bonded sureties; right to fair trial and timely prosecution.
|
16 September 2021 |
|
Five accused convicted of aggravated robbery, arson, malicious damage and trespass; attempted murder and indecent assault not proved.
* Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – elements: theft, violence/threat, deadly weapon, participation – proof beyond reasonable doubt by eyewitnesses and police photographs. * Criminal law – Arson and malicious damage – photographic and eyewitness evidence admissible and sufficient absent valuation. * Property offences – Criminal trespass – actual possession and intent to intimidate/commit offences. * Criminal law – Doctrine of common intention (s.20 PCA) – liability where a common unlawful purpose exists or develops. * Evidence – Alibi must be raised early; afterthought alibi may be rejected. * Attempted murder/indecent assault – specific perpetrator and requisite intent must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
|
15 September 2021 |