Public Prosecutor v Terrence Kaveku

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Frost CJ, Prentice DCJ, Williams J
• Judgment Date: 29 April 1977
• Citation: [1977] PNGLR 110
• Court: Supreme Court
• Year: 1977
• Judgement Number: SC113

Supreme Court: Frost CJ, Prentice DCJ, Williams J

Judgment Delivered: 29 April 1977

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE]

THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

V

TERRENCE KAVEKU

Waigani

Frost CJ Prentice DCJ Williams J

27 April 1977

29 April 1977

CRIMINAL LAW — Appeal against sentence — Two convictions for unlawfully wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm — Sentences to be served consecutively — Totality principle — Total period of imprisonment to be not excessive — Sentences of 3 years imprisonment substituted for sentences of 15 months imprisonment.

On appeal against inadequacy of sentences in circumstances where the respondent was convicted on two charges of unlawful wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm (both instances being premeditated and involving weapons) and was sentenced in each case to 15 months imprisonment, such sentences to be cumulative.

Held

(1) In the circumstances the sentences imposed were inadequate.

(2) When consecutive sentences are imposed a final review of the sentence is to be made by the Court to ensure that the total is not excessive.

Secretary for Law v. Suares, [1974] P.N.G.L.R. 288 at p. 290, followed.

(3) Each conviction justified a sentence of three years imprisonment.

(4) (Frost C.J. dissenting) Having regard to the totality principle, sentences of three years imprisonment should be imposed, the second sentence to be cumulative on the first.

Appeal

These were appeals pursuant to s. 23 of the Supreme Court Act against inadequacy of sentences of 15 months imprisonment, the second sentence to be cumulative on the first, imposed on convictions of unlawful wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm.

Counsel

KB Egan and BTJ Sharp for the appellant

GC Lalor for the respondent

Cur. adv. vult.

29 April 1977

FROST CJ: These are appeals by the Public Prosecutor pursuant to the Supreme Court Act s. 23 against the decision of a judge of the National Court as to two sentences, each of 15 months to be served consecutively, imposed upon the respondent at the Lae sittings in October 1976. The convictions were both for unlawful wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm.

The cases are unfortunate because both accused and his two victims, a man called Kefa and a woman called Joyceline (Jocelyn) are from Tufi and appear originally to have had good relations between them. The accused has had some secondary schooling in the Northern District, as it was, and a fairly continuous record of employment in various parts of Papua New Guinea over a number of years.

On psychiatric examination the respondent was found to be suffering no mental illness. He had two prior convictions in the lower courts, one for personal violence and the other for damage to property. Also to be taken into account was that he had spent about 4 months in custody.

I agree with the statement of the facts set out in the judgment, which I have read in draft, of the Deputy Chief Justice and Williams J.

The effect of s. 23 is to confer an unfettered discretion on this Court to vary the sentence (R. v. Pia-Afu [1971-1972] P. & N.G.L.R. 393) but as the Court said in that case, "This, however, does not mean that this court should interfere with a sentence pronounced by a trial judge unless it is clearly satisfied that the sentence should be altered." — at p. 396.

The offence of which the respondent was convicted on each occasion is a grave one punishable by life imprisonment. Both offences were premeditated and carried out with great determination. The second offence in my...