Court name
High Court
Case name
S v Wadeinge
Media neutral citation
[2007] NAHC 151













CASE NO.: CR 25/07





IN
THE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA


In
the matter between:





THE
STATE





versus






KAMATI WADEINGE






[HIGH COURT REVIEW CASE NO.: 1384/06]





CORAM:
PARKER, J.
et MANYARARA, AJ.



Delivered on: 2007 FEBRUARY
20





REVIEW
JUDGMENT:


PARKER,
J:






[1]
The accused was convicted on her guilty plea to housebreaking with
intent to steal and theft. She was sentenced to three years’
imprisonment.





[2]
In response to a query as to why an effective imprisonment of three
years’ was imposed, the learned magistrate states that she took
into account the following factors: the accused pleaded guilty, she
is a first offender and the value of the things stolen is N$425,50.
In addition, she says, she took into account the following
considerations, namely, the prevalence of the offence in Namibia and
the interest of society. She also states that two years’
imprisonment “is appropriate in the circumstances”, yet
she imposed a sentence of three years’ imprisonment.



.


[3] It is trite that sentencing is
within the domain of the trial court; however, a reviewing or an
appeal court may interfere with the sentence imposed if it induces a
sense of shock in the latter court. It induces in me a great sense
of shock that the learned magistrate imposed a direct imprisonment of
three years, if regard is had to the following: (1) the accused
person pleaded guilty, which in itself shows her sense of remorse;
(2) the accused person is a first offender; and (3) the smallness of
the value of the items stolen. More important, in her judgment, the
learned magistrate did not say a word as to why she imposed a
sentence of direct three years’ imprisonment. For these reasons, I
am of the view that a sentence of three years’ imprisonment is not
appropriate in the circumstances.





[4]
In the result, I make the following orders:




  1. The conviction is confirmed.



  2. The sentence is set aside and the following is put in its place:




Nine months’ imprisonment, six months of which are suspended for



three years on condition that the accused is not convicted of theft



committed during the period of suspension.












______________



PARKER, J










I agree








_________________



MANYARARA, AJ