The Court of Appeal held that Bihoyiki Jean could not receive a sentence below the statutory minimum of 15 years for defilement followed by cohabitation with a minor.
The Court of Appeal held that the appellant had already received the minimum sentence permitted by the current law, and prior discretionary guidelines could not override statutory minimums. Further mitigation was legally barred.
The Court of Appeal held that admitting guilt for the first time on appeal does not justify sentence reduction, but it may still adjust sentence for proportionality.
Given the defendant's age, first-time offender status, admission of guilt, and consistent jurisprudence, the sentence is reduced to 13 years' imprisonment to ensure proportionality with the offense's gravity.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellants’ plea for further sentence reduction, holding that their late admission of guilt was not a mitigating factor.
The Court of Appeal held that Ngirente Jean Bosco could not receive any further sentence reduction because the High Court had already imposed the minimum lawful term after mitigation.
The Court of Appeal held that since Nkizamacumu Dominique had already received a substantial sentence reduction at the High Court due to his confession and remorse, and given his status as a recidivist, no further reduction was warranted. The sentence imposed by the High Court was proportionate to the gravity of the offense and consistent with legal requirements. The appeal was dismissed and the High Court's judgment affirmed.
The Court of Appeal held that the appellant could not be resentenced below the statutory minimum of 15 years after mitigation had already been applied.
The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to determine disputes over conflicting final judgments; such jurisdiction lies exclusively with the Supreme Court as established in RC 00001/2023/CS.