Anderson v R

• Jurisdiction: Bermuda
• Judge: Zacca P,Evans JA,Ward JA
• Judgment Date: 25 March 2014
• Court: Court of Appeal (Bermuda)
• Docket Number: Criminal Appeal 2012 No 14
• Date: 25 March 2014

[2014] Bda LR 31

In The Court of Appeal for Bermuda

Before:

Zacca P; Evans JA; Ward JA

Criminal Appeal 2012 No 14

Between:

Antoine Anderson

Appellant

and

The Queen

Respondent

Ms G Stewart for the Appellant

Mr G Byrne for the Respondent

The following cases were referred to in the judgment:

Pearman v RUNK [2013] UKPC 29

FoyUNK (1962) 46 Cr App R 290

R v Hills [2009] 1 Cr App R (S) 75

R v JumahUNK [2010] EWCA Crim 2900

R v TaylorUNK [2011] EWCA Crim 2236

Grievous bodily harm while serving sentence in prison — Consecutive sentence to life sentence

JUDGMENT of Zacca P

1. On November 5, 2013 we dismissed the appellant's appeal against sentence and affirmed the sentence. We promised to put our reasons into writing. This follows:

2. On February 20, 2009, the appellant was convicted on a charge of murder. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a provision that he would not be eligible for parole until a period of 15 years had elapsed.

3. On 19^th October 2012, the appellant pleaded guilty to a charge of causing grievous bodily harm to Winston Darrell with intent to do him grievous bodily harm. On October 22, 2013, he was sentenced to a term of 7 years imprisonment. The sentencing judge ordered that the sentence of 7 years was to run consecutive to his parole eligibility period under the life sentence he was now serving. In effect he was to serve the 7 years consecutive to the period of 15 years.

4. The appellant has now appealed against the sentence of 7 years on two grounds of appeal.

• i. The learned judge erred in law in imposing a 7 year term of imprisonment to run consecutive to a life sentence which is currently being served.

• ii. The sentence is manifestly excessive in that it runs consecutive to the life sentence which is currently being served.

5. It is to be observed that the sentence imposed was to run consecutive to his parole eligibility period and not to the life imprisonment.

6. Briefly the facts of the offence are that at the time when he was serving a term of life imprisonment at the Westgate Correctional Facility, the appellant carried out a vicious and a protracted assault on another inmate causing very serious injuries.

7. The injuries alleged to have been inflicted was a fracture to the left eye socket, a broken nose, 8 fractured teeth. The victim suffered from memory loss and for several months had serious difficulties with his sight and speech.

8. Ms Gabriella Stewart for the appellant submitted that the sentence of 7 years should be made concurrent to the life imprisonment because one could not impose a consecutive sentence to one of life imprisonment.

9. The Criminal Code Act 1907 makes the following provisions:

‘70J (1) Subject to this section a sentence of imprisonment passed by the Supreme Court of Summary...