Barbara Gayle, Staff ReporterWITH THOROUGH and well- researched legal submissions, Byron Mesquita, 46, a welder of Ensom City in St. Catherine, has succeeded in having his 20-year prison sentence for robbery with aggravation reduced to 12 years imprisonment
Mesquita and an accomplice had held up the operators of the Great Pond Wholesale, Ocho Rios, St. Ann at about 4.30 p.m. on July 10, 2000 and robbed them of $20,000 and a gold bracelet.
He had appealed against his convictions for illegal possession of firearm and robbery with aggravation, but the court dismissed his appeal. Mesquita who has seven previous convictions, had committed the robbery eleven months after he was released from prison.
He was subsequently held by the police and placed on an identification parade in August 2000. He was identified as the man who was armed with a gun during the robbery.
FOUND GUILTY OF CHARGES
Mr. Justice Howard Cooke found him guilty of the charges and sentenced him on May 18, 2001 to 10 years imprisonment for illegal possession of firearm and 20 years imprisonment for robbery with aggravation. The sentences were to run concurrently.
The Court of Appeal comprising Mr. Justice Paul Harrison, Mr. Justice Seymour Panton and Mrs. Justice Zaila McCalla, after hearing legal arguments from Mesquita who represented himself, reduced his sentence and ordered that the sentence should run from May 18, 2001. Mesquita was in prison awaiting the outcome of his appeal.
BEARDS SPRINKLED
WITH FLOUR
He argued that the identification parade was unfair because all the other suspects were much younger than he was. He said the beards of the other suspects were sprinkled with flour while no flour was sprinkled on his beard.
The court held that Mesquita was represented by a senior lawyer and if there were any breaches, his lawyer would have pointed them out.
He argued that a one-way mirror was not used at the identification but the court said that was not a breach.
In dismissing his appeal against his convictions, the court said it did not find any fault with the manner in which the judge conducted the trial.
