|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2023 |
|
|
Repeat defilement offender given 30 years’ imprisonment with hard labour due to aggravating factors outweighing mitigation.
:[
|
21 December 2023 |
|
After mandatory death sentence invalidation, resentencing applies general sentencing principles and resulted in 36 years' imprisonment.
Criminal law – Resentencing after mandatory death sentence declared unconstitutional – Application of general sentencing principles – Admissibility of unsworn statements at resentencing – Aggravating factors: weapon use and group action – Mitigating factors: absence of premeditation, youth, first offender status, rehabilitation – Fixed term 36 years with hard labour.
|
20 December 2023 |
|
Resentencing after mandatory death penalty invalidation; court imposed 34‑year terms, crediting health and first‑offender status.
Constitutional law — resentencing after invalidation of mandatory death sentences; sentencing principles; aggravating factor: group action; mitigating factors: serious ill‑health (HIV/AIDS) and first‑offender status; custodial time accounted for; 34‑year custodial terms imposed.
|
20 December 2023 |
|
On resentencing after an invalid mandatory death sentence, court imposed 42 years’ imprisonment, finding premeditation but insufficient culpability for life or death.
Criminal law – Resentencing after unconstitutional mandatory death sentence – Sentencing principles on resentencing – Aggravating factor: premeditation – Mitigating factors: first offender accepted; alleged mental illness and character evidence not given weight due to inadmissibility – Sections 339/340 relief declined – Sentence of 42 years’ imprisonment with hard labour.
|
20 December 2023 |
|
Resentencing after unconstitutional mandatory death: court applies sentencing principles and imposes 37 years' imprisonment for murder.
Resentencing after unconstitutional mandatory death – general sentencing principles apply – aggravating: weapon used, premeditation – mitigating: youth and first offender – unsworn statements carry no weight – time served considered.
|
20 December 2023 |
|
Prosecution failed to prove theft or gross negligence where employer’s lax banking practices created reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant (s283) – presumption of theft and burden to rebut; Negligence by public servant (s284) – requires high degree of gross negligence or recklessness; employer lax banking procedures and corroborated explanation created reasonable doubt.
|
1 December 2023 |