–
REX
V.
BADARU SHANUSI
WEST AFRICAN COURT OF APPEAL HOLDEN AT LAGOS, NIGERIA
9TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1938
2PLR/1938/63 (WACA)
OTHER CITATION(S)
2PLR/1938/63 (WACA)
(1938) IV WACA P. 11
LEX (1938) – IV WACA P. 11
BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS:
DONALD KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA
CAREY, J.
GRAHAM PAUL, J.
–
BETWEEN:
REX — Respondent
AND
BADARU SHANUSI — Appellant
–
REPRESENTATION
C. N. S. Pollard — for Crown
Appellant in person
–
ORIGINATING COURT(S)
APPEAL FROM CONVICTION BY HIGH COURT
–
ISSUE(S) FROM THE CAUSE(S) OF ACTION
CRIMINAL LAW AND PPROCEDURE:- Possession of Counterfeit coins, contrary to sec. 150A of Criminal Code — Maximum sentence imposed — Where based on Judge’s view that accused was guilty of a more serious offence than that convicted for — Attitude of appellate court thereto
–
DECISION OF THE WEST AFRICAN COURT OF APPEAL
Held:
Trial Judge having taken into account guilt of appellant of a more serious offence (with which he was not charged) the sentence is reduced
1. The trial Judge wrong and not entitled to pass the maximum sentence for the offence by considering the accused guilty of more serious counterfeiting offences (which he was never charged nor convicted for).
2. The offence of which the appellant was convicted is a serious one and he had in his possession a very large number of counterfeit coins. A heavy sentence is therefore called for, though not the maximum.
–
–
MAIN JUDGMENT
The following joint judgment was delivered:
KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA, CAREY AND GRAHAM PAUL, JJ.
In this case, the learned trial Judge passed the maximum sentence for the offence, viz., seven years imprisonment with hard labour. From the note he made in doing so, it is clear that he considered the accused guilty of more serious counterfeiting offences and took this into consideration in deciding upon the maximum sentence.
The appellant was not convicted of the more serious offences and should not have been punished as though he had been. We therefore consider that the sentence should be reduced. But the offence of which the appellant was convicted is a serious one and he had in his possession a very large number of counterfeit coins. A heavy sentence is therefore called for, though not the maximum.
The sentence passed at the trial is quashed and in substitution therefor the appellant is sentenced to five years imprisonment with hard labour.