APPEAL COURT’S DECISIONS

Press, Volume LXXXI, Issue 24678, 22 September 1945, Page 2

APPEAL COURT’S DECISIONS

♦ THREE APPLICATIONS FOR REDUCED SENTENCES (P.A.) WELLINGTON. September 21. The Court of Appeal yesterday heard appeals by three persons, who had been sentenced at Auckland, aßalnst the severity of their sentences. The Court comprised the Chief Justice (the Rt. Hon. Sir Michael Myers), Mr Justice Johnston. Mr Justice Fair, and Mr Justice Northcroft. Mr K. C. Aekins, Auckland, appeared for Mervyn Ramon Hardy, sentenced oy Mr Justice Blair to six months’ reformative detention for so negligently driving a motor-truck as to cause bodily Injury to a traffic inspector. Counsel said that the accused, to enter the Air Force Training Corps, had given his age as 18. whereas ne was between 17 and 18. The Chief Justice said that it appeared now that the accused was only 17, and a boy of that age, it was thought, should not be sent to prison if it could De avoided, though there might be an exception The Court considered that the sentence should be reduced to reformative dentention for 10 days. That would mean that the accused would probably be released immediately. Suspension of his driver’s licence for three years would stand. . VVilbon Hesketh, tobacconist, aged 81, sentenced to 12 months' imprisonmnent with hard laboui by Mr Justice Callan on two charges of receiving stolen goods, applied for a reduction of the sentence. Mr R. E. Pope, for the accused, said that the charges concerned the receiving of fou. cases of American cigarettes valued at £SO and four cases of American tobacco valued at £3O. The accused told detectives that he had bought the cigarettes at £l2 10s a case. After his sentence ho had been fined £25 fur a cu-toms breach. The Court directed that the sentence should stand, Mr W J Stacey appeared for Philip Hayvice. company manager, aged 46, who had been sentenced to six months’ imprisonment with hard labour for failing to stop after a motor accident, failing to ascertain whether the man he had hit was injured, and tailing to render Practical assistance after the accident. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty on tlie charge of negligent driving. Counsel submitted that there had been no negligence. bad visibility, and no injury to 'he pedestrian. The accused was in sole charge of a business with a turnover of £50.000 a year. The Court decided that the sentence should stand.