2( I R 1984 February 16 [Λ Loi/ou MALACHTOS A M > S A W J D I S JJ ] MARIOS NICOU APOSTOl OU Appellant ι I HE POLICE Respondents (Cimunal Appeal No 4490) Cnnnnal Law—Sentence—Mining in Ins possession b\ night wnhoit tawJul e\dise instruments oj house-breaking eonspirats to commit a ft Ionι and stealing—Need to men o/jeiues ι claim· to propert\ which is tejt unattended with setentx—Appellant lunim; a piewotis conviction joi stealing—Sentence of 7 months ιηφιisonment—Upheld Cimimed Law—Sentence—h\a/uatioii oj, within the ambit oj the tnal Judge—Coiut oj appeal mtcijeus ij sentence wrongin pun ciple oi tithe ι manifest1\ e\(essne οι manifestI\ inadequate The dppellajil pleaded guilty to 'lie offences of having in his possession by mghi without lawful excuse instruments oi house-bieaking, contrary to section 296 (c)(i) and to the offence of conspnacy to commn a felony, coniiary to section 371 of the Criminal Cede Cap 154 and was sentencedto seven montlis imprisonment In passing sentence the tnal Judge took into consideration anothercase which was pending against the appel lant and in which he was charged of stealing a motoicycle The appellant had a previous conviction of stealing in which he was placed on probation for 18 months, and the above offences were committed whilst he was on probation When arrested in respect of the first two offences he admitted that he intended to steal various spare parts from cars parked outside Makanos Stadium in order to sell them Upon appeal against sememe Held, that in the circumstances of this case and guided by the 21 Apostolou \ . Police
(1984)principle that the evaluation of the appropriate sentence is in the first place within the ambit of the irial Judge and that this Court only interferei if such a decision is wrong in principle or either manifestly excessive or manifestly inadequate, this Court has come to the conclusion that this appeal should be 5 dismissed as there is no reason to interfere with the sentence imposed. Held, further, that offences of this nature which relate to property which by their very nature are left unattended in open spaces and the detection of which is difficult should really be 10 dealt with adequate severity FOthat their commission will be discouraged. Appeal dismissed. Appeal against sentence. Appeal against sentence by Marios Nicou Apostolou who 15 was convicted on the 21st December, 1983 at the District Court of Nicosia (Criminal Case No. 14813/83) on one count of the offence of having in his possession by night instruments for house-breaking contrary to section 296(c)(
- i)and on one count of conspiracy to commit a felony contrary to section 371 of 20 the Criminal Code, Cap. 154 and was sentenced by Laoutas, S.D.J, to seven months' imprisonment. Appellant appeared in person. A. V/adimirou, for the respondents. A. Loizou, J. gave the following judgment of the Court, 25 The appellant was found guilty on his own plea on two charges, one of having in his possession by night without lawful excuse instruments of house-breaking, contrary to section 296(c)(
- i)and one of conspiracy to commit a felony contrary to section 371 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154. 30 On the 7th September, 1983, at about 9.10 p.m., Acting Police Sergeant Charalambous whilst on duty in the parking space outside Makarios Stadium, saw the appellant and another person, ex accused 2, jumping over the surrounding wall of the Stadium on to the parking space, where motor-cars 35 and motor-cycles had been parked by the spectators of a match that was taking place at the time. He stopped them and he found the appellant to be carrying a bag in which there 22 2 C.L.R. Apostolou v. Police A. Loizou J. were instruments of house-breaking, namely, one screw-driver, one spanner, one pair of gloves and one reflecting lamp. When asked what he was doing he gave the explanation that he was going for a walk but when further questioned, he admitted that 5 he intended to steal various spare parts in order to sell them. Thedisposal of the stolen items waseasyto bedone as the appellant was an apprentice mechanic for motorcycles at the garage of Yamaha. The family and personal circumstances of the appellant 10 appear in a Welfare Officer's report made available to the Court. He left the Secondary School at the fourth class and worked for some time before heenlisted in the National Guard from which he was released on medical grounds after 21 months of service. He has one previous conviction of stealing on the 31st May, 15 1983, when he was placed on probation for 18 months. It was whilst so on probation and in fact when he appeared. according to the Welfare Officer's report, to be co-operative that the the subject offences were committed. The learned trial Judge in imposing the sentenceof imprisonment of seven months 20 stressed the seriousness of the offence and, as he said, after taking into consideration the personal circumstances of the appellant. The notice of appeal was prepared by the appellant in person whilst in prison and the only ground given therein is that the 25 sentence is manifestly excessive. In the circumstances of this case and guided by the principle that the evaluation of the appropriate sentence is in the first place within the ambit of trial Judges and that this Court only interferes if such a decision is wrong in principle or either 30 manifestly excessive or manifestly inadequate, we have come to the conclusion that this appeal should be dismissed as there is no reason to interfere with the sentence imposed. More so as we should not loose sight of the fact that another criminal offence was taken into consideration, though regrettably the 35 particulars ofthat other offence werenot recordedin the minutes of the Court. A perusal, however, of the relevant file of Case No. 14812/83 shows that the offence which the appellant so admitted and asked to be taken into consideration was one 23 \ . Loizou J. -Vpostolou \. Police
(1984)of stealing contrary to sections 255 and 262 of the Criminal Code. Its particulars were that the appellant on a date unknown between June and August 1982, at Ayia Napa in thedistrict of Famagusta. stolea motorcycleof the make Yamaha of a value of C£42.-, property of a person unknown. 5 No doubt offences of this nature which relate to property which by their very nature are left unattended in open spaces and the detection of which is difficult should really be dealt with adequate severity so that their commission will be discouraged. In the result the appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed. 24 ]0