(1984)1984 December 6 [L. Loizou, DEMETR[ADES AND SAWIDES, JJ.] MICHAEL ANDREA PSYLLA, Appellant, THE REPUBLIC Respondent. {CriminalAppeal No. 4558). Criminal Law—Sentence—Bulglary and t/ieft—Appellant burdened with ο long list of previous convictionsfor similar offences—In which he was treated leniently—All measures of reformation tried on appellant without encouragingresults—Medical report tliatappellant sufferingfrom personality disorder and imprisonment may cultivateinhim an antisocialfeeling —in all the circumstances sentence of four years' imprisonment neither manifestly excessive nor wrong inprinciple, in view, especicdly, of the alarming increase of offences of this nature. 5 The appellant was convicted, on his own plea, for the offence 10 of burglary and theft of jewellery valued at £24,000 and was sentenced to four years' imprisonment. Γη passing sentence the trial Court took into consideration another offence of a similar nature: The appellant was aged 26, married with a minor child. At the age of 15he was committed to the Reform 15 School for a number of breakings and stealings. He had a long list of about 20 other previous convictions, most of them for breaking into churches and stealing money, burglaries, and stealing, all committed between 1975 and 1981. The sentences which were passed on him varied from probation, 20 suspended sentences of imprisonment and terms of imprison ment ranging from 4 to 18 months. In 1979 the Court of Appeal, in the light of the contents of a social investigation re port and a medical report set aside a sentence of 12 months* imprisonment, which was passed on the appellant for the offence 25 of breaking and stealing from a church and substituted it for a probation order for two years. According to a psychiatric 420 2 C.L.R. 5 10 Psylla v. Republic , report,which was before theAssize Court theappellant suffered from personality disorder with two main manifestations: Irri tability with impulsive behaviour, and an urge to steal, and that although both have diminished in intensity and frequency he was still in need of prolonged and uninterrupted psychiatric treatment. In the opinion of the doctor, imprisonment would cultivate in the appellant an antisocial feeling and his urge to • take revenge against society, through the antisocial practice of thieving. The stolen property was delivered by the appellant to the police. Upon appeal against sentence: ]5 Held, that there is nothing to indicate that the sentence im posed on the appellant was in any way wrong in principle and this Court has not been persuaded that in all the circumstances and in view of the alarming increase of offences of thisnature, it is manifestly excessive;andthat,accordingly, theappeal must be dismissed. Appeal dismissed. 20 Cases referred to: Psyllav. Police
(1979)Τ C.L.R. 224. 25 30 Appeal against sentence. Appeal against sentence by Michael Andrea Psylla who was convicted on the 2nd July, 1984 at the Assize Court of Larnaca (Criminal Case No. 5694/84) on one count of the offence of burglary and theft contrary to section 292(a) of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154 and was sentenced by Papadopoullos, P.D.C., Constantinides, S.D.J, and Arestis, D.J.to four years' imprison ment. Appellant appeared in person. R. Gavrielides, Senior Counsel of the Republic, for the respondents. Cur. adv. vult. 35 L. Loizou J. read the following judgment of the Court. The appellant was convicted, on his own plea, by an Assize 421 L. Loizou J. Psylla v. Republic
(1984)Court sitting at Larnaca for the offence of burglary and theft ofjewelleryvalued at some£24,000.-thepropertyoftheNadina Demetriou of Larnacacontrarytosection 292(a)oftheCriminal Code Cap.
- Hewassentenced to four years' imprisonment. He has filed the present appeal himself from the central prisons on the ground that the sentence is excessive. 5 The facts of the case are not in dispute and briefly they are asfollows: Theappellant is26yearsold,married withaminor child. The offence was committed on the 11th May, 1984 at about 10.00 p.m. The appellant gained access to the dwel- 10 ling house by opening a pane of a back door and pulling open the bolt on the inside of the door. He searched the house with the help of a torchlight he had with him and found some ofthejewellery inthedrawer ofa bedsidetableinthe bedroom. In the drawer of another bedside table of the same bedroom 15 he found two keys. With oneof the keys he opened the wardrobe and with the other a drawer of the wardrobe in which he found more jewellery. He put all the stolen property in a bag andthenhelockedboththedrawerandthewardrobeandput the keys back where he had found them. He left the house 20 through another door which he opened from the inside and closed it again when he went out. He hid the bag with the jewellery in a field near Aradhippou village. The dwelling house in question was that of his then employers. In passing sentence the Court, at the request of counsel then 25 appearing for the appellant and with the consent of counsel appearing for the prosecution, took into consideration another offence of the same nature committed a few days earlier, which was pending against the appellant. On that occasion he broke open a store room in the yard of the same premises and stole 30 somesilver articleswhich he later soldtoasilversmithinNicosia for £200.-. He was traced and arrested by the police as a result of information given to them by ihe silversmith to whom the appellant had disclosed hisname. After his arrest for that case, the appellant made a voluntary statement to the police 35 in whichheadmitted both offences and described in somedetail how he had committed them. He also led the police to the place where the bag with the stolen property was hidden and delivered it to them. 422 2 C.L.R. Psylla v. Republic L. Loizou J. At the age of 15the appellant wascommitted to the Reform School for a number of breakings and stealing. He has, in addition, a long list of about 20 other previous convictions, most of them for breaking into churches and steal5 ing money, burglaries and stealing, all committed between 1975 and
- Thesentencespassedon him for theseprevious convictions varied from probation, suspended sentences of imprisonment and terms of imprisonment ranging from 4 to 18 months. 10 The Assize Court had also before it a social investigation report and a psychiatric report. It appears from the forme; that variousmeasuresofreformation weretried ontheappellant but without encouraging results, in spite of the help of society and the support of his family. 15 The psychiatrist who made the report, givesit as his opinion that the appellant suffered from personality disorder with two main manifestations: (a) Irritability with impulsive behaviour, and (b)an urgetosteal,and that although bothhavediminished in intensity and frequency he is still in need of prolonged and 20 uninterrupted psychiatric treatment. In the opinion of the doctor, imprisonment willcultivateintheappellant anantisocial feeling and his urge to take revenge against society, through the antisocial practice of thieving. It is, wethink, pertinenttonotethat theappellant was before 25 this Court in October, 1979, again on appeal from a sentence of 12months' imprisonment passed on him for theoffence of breaking and stealing from a church. (Michalakis Andreou Psyllav. The Police
(1979)2 C.L.R. 224). In that case also theCourthadbeforeitamedicalreportandasocialinvestigation 30 report. Themedicalreport,whichwasgivenbythesamedoctoi who gave the report in the present case, was to the effect that hiscondition wasimproving. In the socialinvestigation report it wasstatedthattheappellant hadduringthat year gotmarried andthatthecoupleweregettingonverywell;andthattheappel35 lant had found steady employment and his employers were satisfied with his work. TheCourt ofAppeal,inthelightoftheabovefacts, to which the trial Court had not givendue weight, set aside the sentence 423 L. Loizou J. Psylla v. Republic
(1984)of imprisonment and substituted it for a probation order fo· two years. Since then the appellant has committed several offences but in none of them was he sent to prison. In a long address in mitigation of Ids sentence before this Court the appellant stressed the fact that for two and a half years he has not committed any offence; that in spite of the high value of the stolen property he has admitted the offence, after he was arrested, and delivered it ίο the police; and his psychological and family circumstances. 5 10 Reading the careful and detailed judgment of the Assize Court it isabundantlyclear to ustliatall relevant considerations were duly taken into account but the Court, nevertheless, felt bound to impose the sentence of imprisonment appealed from as the appellant had failed to take advantage of the many 15 opportunities afforded to him in the past and had become a menace to society. Thereis nothing to indicatethatthesentence imposed onhim was in any way wrong inprinciple,norhave we been persuaded that in all the circumstances and especially in view of the 20 alarming increase of offences of this nature, it is manifestly excessive. In the result, we dismiss the appeal. We have no doubt that the prison authorities will see to it that the appellant will have all thenecessary treatmentthat hemay be inneed of while 25 seiving his sentence. Appeal dismissed. 42A