THEODOROS PANAYIOTI SHOURRIS ν. THE REPUBLIC
(1961)1 CLR 41 ΠΑΓΚΥΠΡΙΟΣ ΔΙΚΗΓΟΡΙΚΟΣ ΣΥΛΛΟΓΟΣ CyLaw | Αναφορικά μ'εμάς | " target="_top">Επικοινωνία | Όροι χρήσης Έρευνα - Κατάλογος Αποφάσεων - Εμφάνιση Αναφορών (Noteup on) - Αρχείο σε μορφή PDF - Αφαίρεση Υπογραμμίσεων
(1961)1 CLR 41 1961 February 17 [O' BRIAIN, P., ZEKIA, VASSILIADES and JOSEPHIDES, JJ.] THEODOROS PANAYIOTI SHOURRIS, Appellant, v. THE REPUBLIC Respondent. (Criminal Appeal No. 2300) Trial in criminal cases-Sentence-Previous convictions-Only those intended to be proved should be mentioned. Criminal Procedure-Appeal against sentence-Reviewing sentence by the Hight Court. Counsel appearing for the prosecution stated to the trial court when it was about to pass sentence that the accused (appellant) had fifty one previous convictions out of which he only intended to prove four. The accused was sentenced to three years' imprisonment. He appealed against sentence. Held:
(1)Counsel for the prosecution should only mention convictions which he intends to prove and is in a position so to do.
(2)Otherwise the accused may be prejudiced in the mind of the court.
(3)In the instant case the statement that the accused (appellant) had fifty one previous convictions must have affected the mind of the trial court.
(4)Taking into consideration also the fact that the appellant for quite some time prior to this conviction had not committed any offence and that he has now decided to change his mode of life, the court considers that a sentence of two years' imprisonment from the date of the conviction would be adequate in the circumstances. Appeal allowed. Sentence of three years' imprisonment reduced to one of two years' imprisonment. Appeal against sentence. The appellant was convicted on the 3.1.61 at the Assize Court of Limassol (Criminal Case No. 12328/60) of burglary contrary to section 292 (a) of the Criminal Code Cap. 154 and was sentenced by Michaelides Ag. P.D.C. Limnatitis and Orphanides, Ag. D.JJ., to 3 years' imprisonment. R. R. Denktash for the appellant. K. C. Talarides for the respondent. The judgment of the Court was read by :- VASSILIADES, J.: In this case the appellant pleaded guilty to a charge of breaking and entering into a dwelling house at Limassol at night time, and was sentenced by the Assize Court of Limassol on the 3rd January, 1961, to three years imprisonment. The Court has carefully considered the case in the light of the submissions made by learned counsel on both sides. Counsel for the appellant took the point that when the trial Court was about to pass sentence on the appellant, counsel for the prosecution stated to the Court that the appellant had fifty one previous convictions out of which he only intended to prove four; and in fact he did so. This Court takes the view that in such a case, counsel for the prosecution should only mention convictions which he had in mind to prove. Convictions which are not intended to be proved, or cannot be proved, should not be mentioned, as this may well prejudice the accused in the mind of the Court in dealing with sentence. In this case, the statement that accused had 51 previous convictions must have affected the mind of the trial Court. And on this ground the Court take the view that the sentence imposed on the appellant should be reduced. Taking into consideration all that has been urged by the counsel for the appellant, and the fact that for quite some time prior to this conviction, the appellant had not committed any offence, and that he has now decided to change his mode of life and become a good citizen, the Court considers that a sentence of two years' imprisonment would be adequate in the circumstances. The appeal is, therefore, allowed to that extent; and the sentence of the trial Court, varied accordingly. The sentence of three years' imprisonment is reduced to two years' imprisonment from the date of conviction. Appeal allowed. Sentence of three years' imprisonment reduced to one of two years' imprisonment. cylaw.org: Από το ΚΙΝOΠ/CyLii για τον Παγκύπριο Δικηγορικό Σύλλογο