Kusenda v People (Appeal 22 of 1986) [1988] ZMSC 66 (19 April 1988)
The appellant provided no valid ground of appeal and the trial judge did not misdirect himself; the conviction and sentence were proper and must stand.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1988] ZMSC 66
- Parties
- Appellant: Dickson Kaunda Kusenoa; Respondent: The People
- Court
- Supreme Court of Zambia
- Jurisdiction
- Zambia
- Case Number
- Appeal 22 of 1986
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Aggravated Robbery, Appeals, Sentencing
- 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
Dickson Kaunda Kusenoa
Appellant
The People
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for aggravated robbery was proper
- 2 Whether there was any misdirection by the trial judge
- 3 Whether the sentence imposed was lawful
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant provided no valid ground of appeal and the trial judge did not misdirect himself; the conviction and sentence were proper and must stand.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- conviction for aggravated robbery affirmed
- sentence of fifteen years imprisonment with hard labour affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA < Appeal 4tew -22ef4986 HOLDEN AT KABWE (Criminal Jurisdiction) ' ’ ; »•: ' .. M ■'••'■■ W;:z? Iptf ‘ -rC'r' ...... • “W _ ■ sir DICKSON KAUNDA KUSENOA Appellant ' < V / . I* > K 1 V ‘ THE PEOPLE ? • ■■-t.. Respondent .' CORAM Gardner, Ag. D. C. J., Bweupe and Challa, Ag. JJ. S., I J •■.. 19th April, 1988 J. Mwanakatwe. Asst, Senior Legal Aid Counsel, for the appellant G. S. Phiri. Senior State Advocate, for the^fespondent _________________ Gardner J.s delivered ^^0S”>®nt court." ’ ' i •. . • • >.• '■ c • ■ ..’ v; g& This is an appeal against a conviction for aggravated robbery; the particulars of the offence being that the appellant, on the 25th day of April, 1984, at Kaoma, jointly and whilst acting together with someone unknown, did steal a number of articles from a shop valued at Ki.001,66n and attheutime of such Stealing did threaten ’ to use actual viPL«nce against Ruth Kambqnge and Sil Ho LifasL The facts of th^casV ware that a ninber of people Ursi into the shop referred to in the charge and by pointing what purported to be a gun made the people in the shop give up possession of all the property mentioned in the ^charge. Two of the prosecution witnesses in the'shop ■ f - > I- recognised the ^appeHant as being one of the people who was amongst those that had committed the robbery. They had seen him on number of occa sions before. They reported the appellant to the police who apprehended him. > 2/In........... - 2 * Innis appeal the appellant has merely said that he is not satisfied'^ with the ruling of the High Court judge. This 1$ no ground of appeal^ whatsoever. We are Quite satisfied that in no way did the learned trial judge misdirect himself in finding the appellant guiltyofthls of fence. The appeal against conviction la dismissed. ... i ; The appellant was sentenced to fifteen years Imprisonment with hard labour. This is the muiem sentence prescribed by law. no appeal Iles therefros. The appellant was not on-Mt own when M comitted this offence. r'G;' S; ti £s< Nr •.’onddnt furihe appal i\ . -•■-•■ ?•■ A: 8. T« Gardner MTiwitwmiaiieFWSTicg far d^eUant.- on i .^11 ^itsi ROting tocher • ■, Vi.r'iirffTTT er/ serins wfimew judge tr ’trr® ■ /.,. ^h?- psintl^ what possesslo® of I the .p-re^arty ' *' '^' S.'thalla * T37T>z -' ''jp* :■