Stanley `Smiler' Perinchief on appeal.

Mr. Justice Ward allowed Perinchief's appeal of Magistrate Edward King's hybrid sentence of a $900 fine and a one-year prison sentence for attacking Max the Pitbull on October 10.

Perinchief argued that as he was unable to pay the fine, the six-month default penalty which was ordered to be served consecutive to the prison sentence was "harsh and excessive''.

During the appeal Mr. Justice Ward expressed concern about the sentence -- effectively a year-and-a-half -- by saying repeatedly: "What about the aggregate?''.

Yesterday he explained to Perinchief that a magistrate can sentence a person to consecutive sentences but the total cannot exceed 12 months in prison.

Mr. King's sentence, the Chief Justice said, "ignores the scheme'' of the Summary Jurisdiction Act which allowed him to send the case to the Supreme Court if he thought his one-year sentencing powers were inadequate.

The Chief Justice said: "Under the Care and Protection of Animals Act of 1975 a sentence of a period of imprisonment coupled with a fine would only seem to be appropriate in circumstances where not only cruelty was involved but also in addition where the defendant had derived a pecuniary advantage from the crime.'' He added: "That was not the case here. Therefore the totality of the sentence is excessive.

"The appeal is allowed. The fine is quashed and the sentence is varied to one of imprisonment for 12 months.'' "What that means, Mr. Perinchief, is the six months have been taken off so you'll have to spend 12 months for that act of barbarity,'' Mr. Justice Ward concluded.

Earlier he said: "The approach adopted by the learned Magistrate of splitting the sentence for one offence into two parts, one on one day, the other on another day should not be followed.

"If a magistrate is uncertain as to the proper sentence, he should adjourn to consider same and in a case of sufficient gravity should remand the offender in custody pending determination.'' ANIMALS ALS