Bokun Umba v The State (1976) SC92

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Citation: (1976) SC92
• Date: 02 April 1976
• Court: Supreme Court
• Year: 1976

Full Title: Bokun Umba v The State (1976) SC92

Supreme Court: Frost CJ, Prentice DCJ, Williams J

Judgment Delivered: 2 April 1976

1 Criminal law—sentence of 5 years imposed for breaking, entering and stealing from a factory—application for leave to appeal against sentence an ground that it was manifestly excessive—leave to appeal refused

___________________________

Frost CJ and Williams J:

An indictment was presented against the appellant in the National Court at Kundiawa on 13 October 1975 charging that he broke and entered the factory of Chimbu Developments Pty Ltd and therein stole a safe containing K13,800.00, the property of the company.

He pleaded guilty to this charge and was sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour for five years. He now applies to this Court for leave to appeal against the sentence on the ground that it was manifestly excessive.

The principal ground of appeal was based on certain comments of the trial judge when imposing sentence. The principle relied on was that he "acted on a wrong principle or has clearly overlooked, undervalued, overestimated or misunderstood some salient features of the evidence" (see Wanosa v R [1971–72] PNGLR 90). In particular it is said that findings of the trial judge that the factory "was most efficiently broken into", that the appellant was "the brains behind the operation", that the safe was "a fairly large modern safe" which was of "extremely strong construction" and that the operation was carried out in "an intelligent sophisticated and very determined way" cannot be supported by the evidence.

It is also contended by counsel for the appellant that the trial judge gave no or insufficient weight to the following matters:

(1) that a large part of the money contained in the safe was recovered,

(2) that the appellant received none of the proceeds, and

(3) that the appellant pleaded guilty to the charge and generally cooperated with the investigating police.

The evidence shows that the appellant and seven others had a meeting at the appellant's house when breaking and entering the coffee factory and...