2 C.L.R. 1979 October 8 [MALACHTOS, DEMETRIADES AND SAVVIDES, JJ.] PANAYIOTIS IOSIF, • Appellant, v. THE REPUBLIC, Respondent. {Criminal AppealNo. 4040). Criminal Law—Sentence—Forgery of cheques and obtaining money byfalse pretences—Concurrent sentences of five and three years' imprisonment, respectively—Not manifestly excessiveorwrong in principle. Court of Appeal—Appeal against sentence—Principles on which Courtof Appealacts. , The appellant pleaded guilty to three counts of the offence of forgery of three cheques and to three counts of the offence of obtaining money by false pretences and was sentenced tofive years' imprisonment on each of the forgery counts and to three years' imprisonment on each of the obtaining money by false pretencescounts,allsentencestorunconcurrently. Theamount involved intheabovecountswasC£5,50O.—. Inpassingsentence upon the appellant the Assize Court look into account another pending case against him of a similar nature and also a similar previous conviction for which he .was bound over. Uponappealagainst sentence: Held,that the Court of Appeal cannot substitute on appeal its own assessment of the right sentence in place of that of the trial Court; that this Court can only interfere if the sentence imposed bythetrialCourtiseithermanifestly excessiveorwrong in principle; that the sentence imposed by the Assize Court is neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle but it is the proper sentence; and that, accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. .Appeal dismissed. 221 Iosif r. Republic
(1979)Appeal against sentence. AppealagainstsentencebyPanayiotis Iosifwhowasconvicted on the 14thMay, 1979at theAssizeCourt ofNicosia (Criminal Case No. 10808/79) on three counts of the offence of forgery and on three counts of the offence of obtaining money by false 5 pretences, contrary to sections 331,333,334, 336 and 297,298 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154,respectively and wassentenced by Papadopoulos, S.D.J. Nikitas and Laoutas, D.J.J, tofive years' imprisonment on each of the forgery counts and to three years' imprisonment on each of the obtaining money by false 10 pretences counts, the sentences to run concurrently. M.. Christofides, for the appellant. A. M. Angelides, Counsel of the Republic, for the respondent. MALACHTOS J. gave the following judgment of the Court. 15 Theappellant inthisappealwasconvicted onhisownadmission by the Nicosia Assizes on three counts for forgery of three cheques contrary to sections 331, 333,334 and 336 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154,and on three other counts for obtaining money by false pretences contrary to sections 297 and 298 of 20 the Criminal Code, Cap. 154, and was sentenced to five years imprisonment to each one of thecounts of forgery and to three years imprisonment to each one of the counts of obtaining money by false pretences, all sentences to run concurrently as from 14th May, 1979, the day of his conviction. He has filed 25 the present appeal on the ground that the sentence imposed is excessive. Thefacts of thecaseshortly put arethefollowing:Theappellant in December, 1978, acting as an estate agent helped a certain Christos HjiVassili, a Greek Cypriot residing in London 30 to sell a piece of immovable property situated in Nicosia town for the.sum of £30,
- For this purpose the said Christos Hji Vassili came to Cyprus and collected this amount in cash and after paying his debts amounting to £5,000.- he paid the balance to a bank and received eleven Banker's drafts payable 35 to him in Cyprus Pounds for various amounts varying from £1,000 to £3,500.- each. One of these drafts for £1,000 was delivered to the appellant as his commission and three others two of which for the sum of £2,000 each, and the third one for the sum of £1500were also delivered to him tofindpersons 40
- 2 C.L.R. Iosif v. Republic Malachtos J. in the United Kingdom who were interested to pay their value in United Kingdom currency and to receive Cyprus Pounds in Cyprus where the said drafts were payable. The appellant after endorsing the said drafts forging the signature of Christos 5 Hji Vassili collected in London the amount of the equivalent of C£5,500.—in Sterling and according to his allegations he lost it in gambling in the Olympic Cazino. TheAssizeCourt inpassing sentenceupon theappellant took into account, besides the facts and circumstances of this case, 10 another pending case against him of a similar nature, and also a similar previousconviction for which hewasbound over. Counsel for theappellant in his effort to persuade us that the sentence is manifestly excessive, repeated today the plea in mitigation before the trial Court i.e. that the intention of the 15 appellantwastogivethemoneycollectedto ChristosHjiVassili but in view of the fact that he has a passion for gambling he acted in the way he did. He further stated that the appellant is of ill health suffering from his heart. It iswellestablished inmanycasesdecided bythisCourt that 20 wecannot on appeal substitute our own assessment of theright sentence in place of that of the trial Court. This Court can only interfere if the sentenceimposedbythetrial Court iseither manifestly excessive or wrong in principle. In the present casewemust say that the sentenceimposed by 25 the Assize Court is neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle, but it is in our view, the proper sentence imposed in the circustances. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Appeal dismissed. 223