Anderson Mwape v The People (Appeal 132 of 1998) [2000] ZMSC 85 (6 June 2000)
The sentence of 12 years did not reflect the credit due for a guilty plea and first offender status; it was wrong in principle and should be reduced.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] ZMSC 85
- Parties
- Appellant: Anderson Mwape; Respondent: The People
- Court
- Supreme Court of Zambia
- Jurisdiction
- Zambia
- Case Number
- Appeal 132 of 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Manslaughter, Sentencing, Mitigation, Guilty Plea, First Offender
- 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
Anderson Mwape
Appellant
The People
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of 12 years imprisonment with hard labour for manslaughter was excessive given the appellant's guilty plea and status as a first offender
Ratio Decidendi
The sentence of 12 years did not reflect the credit due for a guilty plea and first offender status; it was wrong in principle and should be reduced.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed in part
Orders
- sentence of 12 years imprisonment with hard labour quashed
- sentence of 6 years imprisonment with hard labour imposed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA Appeal No. 132/1998 AT NDOLA (CRIMINAL JURISDICTION) BETWEEN: ANDERSON MWAPE (cid:9) Appellant AND THE PEOPLE (cid:9) Respondent CORAM: Ngulube CJ., Chirwa and Chibesalcunda JJs. On 6th June, 2000 For the Appellant, in person. For the State, Mr. D. M. Mupeta, Senior State Advocate. JUDGMENT Ngulube CJ. Delivered the judgment of the court. The appellant pleaded guilty to a charge of manslaughter. The facts of the case were that on 17th August 1997 the appellant had a quarrel with his wife Dainess Kashimoto. This erupted into a fight. During such fight the appellant beat up the wife very badly and even strangled her. The learned trial Judge took a very dim view of femicide and imposed a sentence of 12 years imprisonment with hard labour. The appeal before us is against such sentence. The appellant points out that he was a first offender, he pleaded guilty and did not waste the court's time. He also points out that there are nine children who are left without the mother, obviously after he has killed their mother. We have taken into account the circumstances of this case and at the outset we do not wish to be misunderstood that we condone beating of wives nor indeed the beating of husbands by certain wives. However, we do also have to agree with the appellant that it is a cardinal principle in such matters that credit should be given to persons that plead guilty. Again leniency is customarily extended to persons that are first offenders. Twelve years imprisonment with hard labour in our view does no reflect the credit which was due to this appellant and it was wrong in principle. For that reason we propose to interfere. We allow the appeal, quash that sentence and in its place impose a sentence of six years imprisonment with hard labour. The appeal succeeds to that extent. M. M. S. W. Ngulube CHIEF JUSTICE D. K Chirwa SUPREME COURT JUDGE L. P. Chibesalcunda SUPREME COURT JUDGE