S v Seibeb (CRIMINAL 78 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 256 (24 August 2011)

S v Seibeb (CRIMINAL 78 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 256 (24 August 2011)

The conviction was proper but the sentence was defective because the condition of suspension was not clearly formulated; the word 'committed' was omitted, making the condition unclear.

Citation
[2011] NAHC 256
Parties
Prosecution: The State; Accused: Amon Seibeb
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
24 August 2011
Case Number
CRIMINAL 78 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Review Judgment
Outcome
conviction confirmed; sentence altered
Legal Topics
House Breaking, Theft, Sentencing, Suspended Sentence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law House Breaking Theft Sentencing Suspended Sentence

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 1 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Prosecution

Amon Seibeb

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Review Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction was proper
  2. 2 Whether the sentence was properly formulated

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was proper but the sentence was defective because the condition of suspension was not clearly formulated; the word 'committed' was omitted, making the condition unclear.

Court Disposition

conviction confirmed; sentence altered

Orders

  • The conviction is confirmed.
  • The sentence is altered to read: Eighteen (18) months’ imprisonment of which six (6) months are suspended for a period of five (5) years on condition that the accused is not found guilty of house breaking with intent to steal and theft committed during the period of suspension.