Diema v Republic [1976] NRSC 4; [1969-1982] NLR (D) 50 (10 August 1976)

[1969-1982] NLR (D) 50

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NAURU

Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 1976

BRUCE DIEMA

v.

THE REPUBLIC

10^th August, 1976.

Sentence - accused with previous good record - co-accused with bad records - sentences should differentiate between them.

Appeal against a sentence of three months' imprisonment for stealing petrol. The appellant was one of three persons charged jointly. The other two had bad records but the accused was previously of good character. They all played an equal part in the offence.

Held: The Court should have differentiated between the appellant and his co-accused when fixing sentences, so as to give credit for his previous good character.

Appeal allowed. Sentence set aside and sentence of one month's imprisonment imposed in its place.

B. Dowivogo for the appellant.
D. Gioura for the respondent.

Thompson CJ:

The circumstances of the offence justified the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment. Nothing which has been said regarding the appellant would indicate that the Magistrate's decision to impose such a sentence on him was wrong in principle. However, there is some indication that the sentence of three months' imprisonment was chosen because of the bad record of the two Persons convicted with the appellant. As the appellant does not have a bad record that was a fact differentiating him from the other two and due allowance in his favour should have been made for it.

Accordingly the sentence of 3 months', imprisonment imposed on appellant will be reduced to one of 1 month’s imprisoned.