Criminal appeal dismissed; sentence not excessive despite heavy record; appeal without legal advice delayed execution.

[*1246] 1972 January 7

(TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.,

L. LOIZOU, A. LOIZOU, JJ.)

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Savvas Ioannou Savvakis,

Appellant,

v.

The Police,

Respondents.

(Criminal Appeal No. 3291)

Criminal Law - Sentence - Three years' imprisonment for possession of narcotics - Narcotic Drugs Law, 1967 (Law 3/67) and Narcotic Drugs Regulations 1967 - Appellant with a heavy criminal record who has already been given every possible opportunity to reform himself - Sentence not excessive - Appeal dismissed.

Criminal Procedure - Appeal - Dismissal - Sentence reluctantly not made to run from date of dismissal mainly because appellant has filed appeal without having had benefit of legal advice - Section 147 of the Criminal Procedure Law, Cap. 155.

Per curiam: We should like to stress that if prisoners continue to file appeals without good reason, as in the present case, then we may not, on a future occasion, take the exceptional course which we have adopted today.

The appellant appears in person.

M. Kyprianou, Senior Counsel of the Republic, for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

The judgment of the Court was delivered by:-

TRIANTAFYLLIDES,P. : The appellant has [*1247] appealed against the sentence of three years' imprisonment which was passed upon him by the District Court of Limassol when he pleaded guilty to the offence of unlawful possession of 15.6 grams of cannabis, contrary to the relevant provisions of the Narcotic Drugs Law, 1967 (Law 3/67) and of the Narcotic Drugs Regulations, 1967.

The appellant contends that the aforesaid sentence is manifestly excessive; in asking for leniency he has stated that he is a married man with five children and that he intends to reform himself.

In the light of his past criminal record, which comprises eighteen previous convictions for various crimes, it is not possible for us to give weight to his promise to become a law-abiding citizen. He has been given already every possible opportunity for realizing that crime does not pay, because it was not until he had committed the eleventh out of his past offences that he was sent to prison for the first time. His last previous offence, on the 2nd May, 1967s is exactly the same as the present one, namely possession of cannabis, and he was on that occasion sent to prison for two years as from the 9th November, 1967.

We are sorry for the plight of his family but this is not a sufficient reason for interfering with the sentence appealed from, which we find not to be an excessive one; it fits well both the offence of which the appellant has been convicted and the appellant as the particular offender. [*1248]

We have considered whether we should, in dismissing this appeal, allow the sentence to run as from today, in accordance with section 147 of the Criminal Procedure Law, Cap. 155; we have decided reluctantly to order, under such section, that the sentence should run as from the 19th October, 1971, when it was imposed, and we have adopted this course mainly because the appellant has filed this appeal without having had the benefit of legal advice; but we would like to stress that if prisoners continue to file appeals without good reason, as in the present case, then we may not, on a future occasion, take the exceptional course which we have adopted today.

The appeal is dismissed accordingly.

Appeal dismissed.