Makondo v People (Appeal 66 of 1987) [1987] ZMSC 49 (1 September 1987)
The sentence of six years imprisonment with hard labour was not excessive given the circumstances, as the deceased was not at fault and the appellant's actions warranted the punishment imposed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1987] ZMSC 49
- Parties
- Appellant: Golden Makondo; Respondent: The People
- Court
- Supreme Court of Zambia
- Jurisdiction
- Zambia
- Case Number
- Appeal 66 of 1987
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Manslaughter, Sentencing, Appeal
- 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
Golden Makondo
Appellant
The People
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of six years imprisonment with hard labour for manslaughter was too severe given the circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The sentence of six years imprisonment with hard labour was not excessive given the circumstances, as the deceased was not at fault and the appellant's actions warranted the punishment imposed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA APPEAL NO. 66 OF 1987 HOLDEN AT LUSAKA (Criminal Jurisdiction) BETWEEN: GOLDEN MAKONDO APPELLANT -vs- THE PEOPLE RESPONDENT Coram: Ngulube, D. C. J., Gardner and Sakala JJ. S. 1st September, 1987 For the Appellant : In Person For the Respondent : Mr. K. C. Chanda, Senior State Advocate JUDGMENT Ngulube, D. C. J., delivered the judgment of the court. Originally this was to have been an appeal by two appellants but the Senior State Advocate has informed this court that the intended second appellant died on 15th February this year while waiting for his appeal. That appeal has accordingly abated with the death of that appellant. The appellant, with two others including the deceased appellant, pleaded guilty to a charge of manslaughter. The particulars were that on 4th October, 1984 in the Mumbwa district, they unlawfully caused the death of the deceased person in this case. One of the accused persons was the appellant's father. The accused father found the deceased's younger brother-aged sixteen years-in flagrante delicto with the accused father’s fourteen year old daughter. The deceased's younger brother ran away. The next day, the appellant and his co-accuseds went to look for the culprit; they found him and started to beat him when the deceased intervened to stop the chastisement. The trio then turned on to the deceased and beat him with sticks. He died as a result. The appellant now before us is complaining that the six years imprisonment with hard ?/2................ labour - J2 - labour imposed upon him was too severe. He argues in his written grounds that, since the killing was involuntary and since he was smarting under provocation so recent and so strong but he was not master of his senses at that time, more leniency should have been extended to him, as a first offender. We have taken into account these and other grounds advanced and note that the deceased who was killed did not himself do anything wrong. In the circumstances we can find nothing wrong with the sentence of six years. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. M. S. Ngulube DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE B. T. Gardner SUPREME COURT JUBGE E^i/sakaia" SUPREME COURT JUDGE