William Dot Norman Parkop and James A Make v The State
Jurisdiction | Papua New Guinea |
Judgment Date | 23 August 1999 |
Year | 1999 |
Court | Supreme Court |
Judgement Number | SC621 |
Supreme Court: Jalina J, Sevua J, Kirriwom J
Judgment Delivered: 23 August 1999
SC621
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
(In the Supreme Court of Justice)
SCRA No. 59 of 1998
Between:
WILLIAM DOT NORMAN PARKOP & JAMES A. MAKE
And:
THE STATE
MT HAGEN: JALINA, SEVUA & KIRRIWOM JJ
1999: 23 August
Case cited:
Jim Kas & Two Ors v The State — Unreported Supreme Court Decision of May or June 1999
Counsel:
N. Mivini for State/Respondent
Appellants in Person
23 August 1999
DECISION
BY THE COURT: The Appellants were convicted and sentenced by the National Court in Mt Hagen to a term of ten (10) years each. When they appeared in the National Court, they all pleaded guilty to a charge of murder under s. 300 (1) of the Criminal Code. They admitted to killing one of their own clan brothers over a piece of land. It was a customary land owned by the clan but subject to some dispute between them. The appellant James Agamp Make admitted to hitting the deceased on the head with a coffee stick and he fell to the ground.
The Appellants William Dot and Norman Parkop admitted to chopping the deceased with their bush knives on his left thigh and on the right side of his back as the deceased was lying on the ground. The deceased lost a lot of blood from which he died. It was a little over a year ago when they were dealt with by the National Court on 24 July 1998.
They appealed against that decision and these are their grounds of appeal:
1. Defence Lawyer did not present their evidence.
2. Judge did not hear our grounds.
3. Sentence too excessive.
Their appeal is against both their conviction and sentence. The appeal was filed well within time and the question of leave does not apply. Neither does the question of leave on appeal against sentence apply according to the recent Supreme Court decision of Jim Kas and Two Others v The State — Unreported Supreme Court decision of May or June 1999.
GROUND 1 — DEFENCE LAWYER DID NOT PRESENT THEIR EVIDENCE
This ground is not merited in any sense because the appellants had pleaded guilty to the charge of murder. There was therefore no need for the Court to hear any evidence either from them or from the prosecution.
If there was any evidence that the defence considered necessary to place before the Court on behalf of the appellants following their pleas of guilty, that could...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Manu Kovi v The State (2005) SC789
...years for killing husband's pregnant girlfriend by stabbing her on neck with knife); William Dot, Norman Parkop & James A Make v The State (1999) SC621 (10 years for group attack on deceased following land dispute using sticks and bushknife to cut leg and back)). 1. In a contested or uncont......
-
Ignatius Natu Pomaloh v The State (2006) SC834
...The State v Wesley Nobudi, John Lulu Evoa and Franky Yalikiti Fravo (2002) N2510 William Dot Norman Parkop and James A Make v The State (1999) SC621 Winugini Urugitaru v The Queen [1974] PNGLR 283 APPEAL This was an appeal against sentence for manslaughter and unlawful wounding. I N Pomaloh......
-
Manu Kovi v The State (2005) SC789
...years for killing husband's pregnant girlfriend by stabbing her on neck with knife); William Dot, Norman Parkop & James A Make v The State (1999) SC621 (10 years for group attack on deceased following land dispute using sticks and bushknife to cut leg and back)). 1. In a contested or uncont......
-
Ignatius Natu Pomaloh v The State (2006) SC834
...The State v Wesley Nobudi, John Lulu Evoa and Franky Yalikiti Fravo (2002) N2510 William Dot Norman Parkop and James A Make v The State (1999) SC621 Winugini Urugitaru v The Queen [1974] PNGLR 283 APPEAL This was an appeal against sentence for manslaughter and unlawful wounding. I N Pomaloh......