S v Marisa (CRIMINAL 19 of 2006) [2006] NAHC 4 (22 February 2006)

S v Marisa (CRIMINAL 19 of 2006) [2006] NAHC 4 (22 February 2006)

The court confirmed that sentences on counts 1 and 2 may run concurrently with the sentence on count 3, and clarified that concurrent imprisonment should apply only if the fines are not paid.

Citation
[2006] NAHC 4
Parties
Prosecutor: The State; Accused: Simbarashe Marisa
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
22 February 2006
Case Number
CRIMINAL 19 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / Judgment
Outcome
Convictions and sentences confirmed
Legal Topics
Forgery, Uttering, Immigration Control, Sentencing
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Forgery Uttering Immigration Control Sentencing

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Prosecutor

Simbarashe Marisa

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences on counts 1 and 2 may run concurrently with the sentence on count 3
  2. 2 Proper formulation of concurrent sentences when fines are imposed

Ratio Decidendi

The court confirmed that sentences on counts 1 and 2 may run concurrently with the sentence on count 3, and clarified that concurrent imprisonment should apply only if the fines are not paid.

Court Disposition

Convictions and sentences confirmed

Orders

  • Convictions and sentences on counts 1, 2, and 3 are confirmed.
  • If fines on counts 1 and 2 are not paid, the alternative imprisonment shall run concurrently with any alternative imprisonment served in respect of count 3.