Court dismisses appeal on public insult conviction and fine, noting outdated maximum fine amount.
Cipro (CY)
Sintesi Legislator
Generato dall'IAThe Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against her conviction for public insult and the fine imposed for assault. The court held that the evidence warranted the conviction and that inability to pay the fine did not render it manifestly excessive. While upholding the judgment, the court noted the statutory maximum fine for public insult was incompatible with current economic realities.
Regesto Legislator
Generato dall'IASection 243 of the Criminal Code; Section 99 of the Criminal Code: Conviction for public insult is warranted by evidence, and inability to pay a fine does not render a sentence manifestly excessive, though the court noted the statutory maximum fine amount is outdated.
Parole chiave
Generato dall'IADisposizioni normative citate
Generato dall'IADecisioni correlate
Generato dall'IATesto completo
[*1360] 1971 June 25
(TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P., L. LOIZOU, HADJIANASTASSIOU, J J.)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Eleni Evagorou,
Appellant,
v.
The Police,
Respondents.
(Criminal Appeal No. 3260).
Criminal Law - Public insult - Section 243 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154- Conviction warranted by the evidence which the Court below was entitled to accept as true.
Criminal Law - Sentence - Appellant's alleged inability to pay the fine, does not render it a manifestly excessive sentence once it seems to be a proper sentence in the light of the circumstances of this case.
Per curiam: We feel that we should draw the attention of the responsible authorities to the fact that the provision in section 99 for the maximum fine of £5 for the offence of public insult is incompatible with the realities of today as it obviously relates to the times when the value of money was very much higher than it is at present.
The Appellant appears in person.
K. Talarides, Senior Counsel of the Republic, for the Respondents.
JUDGMENT
The judgment of the Court was delivered by:-
TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.: In this case the appellant, who has been found guilty of the offences of assault [*1361] causing actual bodily harm and of public insult, contrary, respectively, to sections 243 and 99 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154, has appealed against her conviction regarding the latter offence and against the sentence imposed on her in respect of the former offence, viz. a fine of £15.
We have examined everything that has been stated by the appellant in support of her contentions. We are of the opinion that her conviction on the count charging her with public insult was warranted by evidence which the Court below was entitled to accept as true; and, also, that even assuming that, as alleged by the appellant, she does not have the means to pay the fine of £15 imposed on her in respect of the assault this is not a sufficient reason for us to hold that such fine is a manifestly excessive sentence, once it seems to us to be, in every respect, a proper sentence in the light of the circumstances of this case; the appellant may apply to the trial Court for time in which to pay this fine and it is up to that Court to decide whether or not to grant her application.
In the result this appeal has to be dismissed; but, before concluding, we feel that we should draw the attention of the responsible authorities to the fact that the provision in section 99 for a maximum fine of £5 for the offence of public insult is incompatible with the realities of today as it obviously relates to the times when the value of money was very much higher than it is at present.
Appeal dismissed.