Collins Anthony Appellant v Patrick Agdoma Cpl. 259 Respondent [ECSC]
Jurisdiction | St Lucia |
Judge | PETERKIN, J.A. (Acting) |
Judgment Date | 16 July 1974 |
Judgment citation (vLex) | [1974] ECSC J0716-1 |
Date | 16 July 1974 |
Court | Court of Appeal (Saint Lucia) |
Docket Number | Magisterial Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 1974. |
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
The Honourable the Acting Chief Justice
The Honourable Mr. Justice St. Bernard
The Honourable Mr. Justice Peterkin (Ag.)
Magisterial Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 1974.
Mr. K. Foster for Appellant
Mr. P. Husbands for Respondent
The Appellant was convicted on 2 separate and distinct complaints of inflicting wounds. On one complaint he was charged with unlawfully inflicting wounds on Francis Emmanuel, and on the second complaint with unlawfully causing wounds to Francis Thomas.
In short, the facts and circumstances are as follows:—
The Appellant was seen by the Constable on the night of 23rd December, 1972, on the Trinity Church Road in Castries, and he was heard to make use of very obscene language. He was spoken to and asked to behave but he paid no heed to his warning and continued, whereupon he was arrested by the Constable who told him that he was under arrest. He resisted and escaped, and they gave chase — the Constable, along with another Constable.
The Appellant armed himself with a bottle, and he broke- that bottle, and in the course of further resisting arrest when the Constables caught up with him, he inflicted injuries on both of them.
He was convicted by the Learned Magistrate and sentenced to peremptory imprisonment of 6 months on each of the two complaints.
Learned Counsel in arguing the appeal, has first argued that the cases were wrongfully heard and determined jointly without the consent of the Appellant. The section in the Criminal Code of St. Lucia which deals with this point is section 1078(2) and that reads as follows:—
"Where there are similar separate complaints by one and the same complainant against separate defendants in respect of the same matter the Court may, if it thinks fit, hear and determine them at one and the same time."
It would appear to this Court that the Learned Magistrate had jurisdiction to take these complaints together if he thought fit to do so, i.e., if he thought that there would be no prejudice done to the Appellant. This he has recorded in his reasons.
By way of contrast, I would like to mention the relevant section in the Grenada Criminal Procedure Code which makes it obligatory in the circumstances for the defendant to be informed of his right and to consent to the cases...
To continue reading
Request your trial