R v Lester Godfrey & Ors. (Confirmation Case No. 737 of 2009) [2010] MWHC 21 (6 July 2010)
The convictions of the 3rd and 4th accused persons were proper as they voluntarily admitted the offence in their caution statements, which were found to be materially true, and stolen property was recovered from their houses.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] MWHC 21
- Parties
- Prosecution: The Republic; Accused: Lester Godfrey; Accused: Five Others
- Court
- High Court of Malawi
- Jurisdiction
- Malawi
- Case Number
- Confirmation Case No. 737 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Confirmation / Confirmation of Convictions
- Outcome
- convictions and sentences of 3rd and 4th accused confirmed
- Legal Topics
- Confirmation of Conviction, Admissibility of Confession, Recovery of Stolen Property
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Republic
Prosecution
Lester Godfrey
Accused
Five Others
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal Confirmation / Confirmation of Convictions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the convictions of the 3rd and 4th accused persons were proper
- 2 Whether the evidence supported the convictions
Ratio Decidendi
The convictions of the 3rd and 4th accused persons were proper as they voluntarily admitted the offence in their caution statements, which were found to be materially true, and stolen property was recovered from their houses.
Court Disposition
convictions and sentences of 3rd and 4th accused confirmed
Orders
- Convictions of 3rd and 4th accused confirmed
- Sentences of 3rd and 4th accused confirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAWI PRINCIPAL REGISTRY Confirmation Case No. 737 of 2009 THE REPUBLIC Versus LESTER GODFREY AND FIVE OTHERS Coram: HON. JUSTICE MANDA Mrs Mbendera for the State Defendants Present (Unrepresented) Mrs Matekenya Court Clerk ORDER ON CONFRIMATION This matter was set down to consider the convictions of the 3rd and 4th accused persons. The reviewing judge did confirm the convictions of the 1st and 2nd and 5th accused persons. In his notes my brother judge did not indicate what he found wrong with the convictions of the 3rd and 4th accused persons, which meant that I had to go through the record of the lower court and see if there was something wrong with the way the court arrived at its decision to convict the two accused persons. Having gone through the record from the lower court and also the judgement that was delivered, I did not see anything wrong with the convictions of the 3rd and 4th accused persons. They both were found to have voluntarily admitted to committing the offence in their caution statements which the court found to be materially true. Apart from that the stolen property from Krazy Kool Company was recovered from the houses of the 3rd and 4th accused persons, with most of the property being found in the house of the 3rd accused. For these items to be recovered, the police (PW2) were lead to the houses of the two accused persons by the 1st and 2nd accused persons and the 5th accused person, respectively (refer to page 116 of the record which is part of the judgment of the court). The 1st, 2nd and 5th accused persons were accomplices to the 3rd and 4th accused persons. In view of this I do not see anything wrong with the convictions of the 3rd and 4th accused persons and I do proceed to confirm them as well as their sentences. Made in Open Court this........day of.....................................2010 K. T. MANDA JUDGE 2