Supreme Court dismisses appeal against cannabis possession conviction where trial court's credibility assessment was not shown to be erroneous.

[*1] 1972 March 3

(TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P., A. LOIZOU, MALACHTOS, JJ.)

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Spyros Georghiou Mantis,

Appellant,

v.

The Police,

Respondents.

(Criminal Appeal No.3313).

Criminal Procedure - Appeal against conviction – Resting on credibility of witnesses - Appellant failed to satisfy Court of Appeal that trial Court erred in accepting as true prosecution evidence – Appeal dismissed.

Witnesses - Credibility - Appeal resting on credibility of witnesses - See, also, under “Criminal Procedure”.

Narcotic Drugs - Possession - Conviction - Appeal.

Appeal - Appeal against conviction resting on credibility of witnesses - See, also, under “Criminal Procedure”.

Court of Appeal - Appeal resting on credibility of witnesses - See, also, under “Criminal. Procedure”.

The Appellant appears in person.

V. Aristodemou, Counsel of the Republic, for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

The judgment of the Court was delivered by: -

TRIANTAFYLLIDES. P.: The appellant appeals [*2] against his conviction of the offence of possessing cannabis contrary to the relevant provisions of the Narcotic Drugs Law, 1967 (3/67) and of the Narcotic Drugs Regulations, 1967.

He was found by the police to be in possession of a packet of cigarettes in which there was hidden a small quantity of cannabis. On conviction by the Court below he was sentenced to fifteen months’ imprisonment; and he has not appealed against this sentence.

During a very lengthy hearing before the trial Court, at which he was defended by counsel, he put forward, on oath, the version that the police evidence to the effect that he had been seen taking the packet of cigarettes out of one of his pockets was false and that in fact he knew nothing about the existence of such packet, which was, according to him, found lying on a low wall near the place where he was being searched by the police. The trial Court did not believe the version of the appellant and proceeded to convict him as aforesaid.

The Supreme Court, in a case such as the present one, where the conviction appealed against is based on the view of the trial Court regarding the credibility of witnesses who testified before it, will not inferfere with the conviction unless it is satisfied by the appellant that the view of the trial Court was erroneous (see, inter alia, Miliotis v. The Police. (1971) 11 J.S.C. 1398). The present appellant has failed to satisfy us that the trial Court erred in accepting as true the prosecution evidence regarding possession by him of the packet of cigarettes containing the cannabis and, therefore, his appeal is dismissed. [*3] As the quantity of cannabis which was found in his possession was a rather small one - 1.4 grams - and as, in view of the fact that it does appear that the appellant is only an addict, and not a peddler of narcotics, the sentence passed on him is quite severe, we decided, in the exercise of our powers under section 147 of the Criminal Procedure Law, Cap. 155, to order that such sentence should not run as from today, when his appeal was dismissed, but as from the date of his conviction.

Appeal dismissed.