Sakala v People (SCZ Appeal 58 of 1993) [1993] ZMSC 105 (18 May 1993)
The Supreme Court found no merit in the appellant's complaint as the record showed only one count with a 5-year sentence, and the sentence was mandatory.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1993] ZMSC 105
- Parties
- Appellant: Felix Sakala; Respondent: The People
- Court
- Supreme Court of Zambia
- Jurisdiction
- Zambia
- Case Number
- SCZ Appeal 58 of 1993
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Stock Theft, Sentencing, Appeal Procedure
- 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
Felix Sakala
Appellant
The People
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed was harsh or excessive
- 2 Whether the conviction and sentence were proper
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court found no merit in the appellant's complaint as the record showed only one count with a 5-year sentence, and the sentence was mandatory.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IM THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA SCZ Appeal No, 58 of 1993 HOLDEN AT LUSAKA (Criminal Jurisdiction) FELIX SAKALA Appellant vs THE PEOPLE Respondent CORAM: Chai la, Muzyamba and Musumaii JJJ. S. 13th May, 1993, For the Appellant : In person For the Respondent : Kr. F. J. Mensah, State Advocate JUDGMENT Chai la, J. S. delivered the judgment of the court. The appellant was convicted on his own plea of the offence of stock theft in respect of one count and was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment with hard labour with effect from the date of arrest which was according to the record 27th February 1991, The sentence was made subject to confirmation by the High Court. The appellant subsequently appealed against conviction and sentence as well. In the grounds of appeal to the High Court, he complained that the 5 years sentence made to run consecutively to the first count was harsh and beyond his endurance. The learned appellate judge in dismissing the appeal stated that there was no merit in the appeal and the appeal was dismissed and that the sentence of 5 years was mandatory. The learned appellate judge further commented Z2...that the - J2 - that the offences complained of by the appellant were committed at different times and the accused was tried at different times by magistrates. The appellant has complained against this ruling. We have found that there is no basis for the appellant to talk of 10 years. The record before us was in respect of one count on which the appellant was given 5 years. There Is therefore no merit in his complaint and the appeal is therefore dismissed. M. S. Chaila SUPREME COURT JUDGE W. M. Muzyamba SUPREME COURT JUDGE C. N. Musuaall SUPREME COURT JUDGE