Linake and Another v R (C of A (CRI) 10 of 8) [2009] LSCA 8 (9 April 2009)

Linake and Another v R (C of A (CRI) 10 of 8) [2009] LSCA 8 (9 April 2009)

The appellant was not under attack, had ample opportunity to retreat, and his claim of self-defence was not supported by the evidence. The trial court misdirected itself regarding the targeting of non-vital parts, and the sentence was manifestly inadequate for the crime of murder. The conviction for murder was proper and the sentence was increased to ten years' imprisonment.

Citation
[2009] LSCA 8
Parties
Appellant: Serame Linake; Respondent: Rex; Appellant (cross Appeal): Director of Public Prosecutions
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
9 April 2009
Case Number
C of A (CRI) 10 of 8
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal and Cross Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appellant's appeal dismissed; Crown's cross-appeal on sentence upheld; sentence increased to ten years' imprisonment.
Legal Topics
Murder, Self Defence, Sentencing, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Murder Self Defence Sentencing Appeal Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Serame Linake

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Director of Public Prosecutions

Appellant (cross Appeal)

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal and Cross Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for murder was proper given the claim of self-defence
  2. 2 Whether the sentence of 8 years imprisonment was manifestly lenient

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was not under attack, had ample opportunity to retreat, and his claim of self-defence was not supported by the evidence. The trial court misdirected itself regarding the targeting of non-vital parts, and the sentence was manifestly inadequate for the crime of murder. The conviction for murder was proper and the sentence was increased to ten years' imprisonment.

Court Disposition

Appellant's appeal dismissed; Crown's cross-appeal on sentence upheld; sentence increased to ten years' imprisonment.

Orders

  • Appellant's appeal dismissed.
  • Crown's cross-appeal on sentence upheld.