Ppatpat, ex parte State of SimDemocracy (Appellant) v keepbloxburgsafe 2025 SDSC 21

Ppatpat, ex parte State of SimDemocracy (Appellant) v keepbloxburgsafe [2025] SDSC 21

Date	29th July 2025
Justices	Chief Justice TheLittleSparty Justice Ivy Cactus Justice Syndicality Justice Ed Justice Britz
Held	The verdict in SD v keepbloxburgsafe [2025] Crim 28 was illegal
Ruling	5-0
Applicable precedent	Judges must follow the statutory sentencing guidelines, [2] A mandatory minimum of a permanent ban is not necessarily “cruel and unusual” or “grossly disproportionate”, [4]

MAJORITY OPINION Per Curiam

Introduction

[1] The appellant is seeking review into the sentence given out in SD v keepbloxburgsafe [2025] Crim 28 on the basis that the 10 year ban given out by Judge Ben was not congruent with the mandatory minimum of a permanent ban available for aggravated doxxing.

[2] Due to the relative simplicity of this case it was handled as a summary per curiam without argumentation, as described in In re Article 1, s5 of the Speedy Courts Act 2024 [2025] SDSC 11 and Reference re Presidential Dismissal of the Vice President [2025] SDSC 14.

Considerations

[3] The court of first instance applied the principles of SD v We_are_all_Uno [2019] Crim 2 to treat the defendant’s guilty plea as a mitigating factor. Mitigating factors, though, can not be used as reason to violate the statutory guidelines given in the Criminal Code (notwithstanding where the sentencing act allows it). Indeed, it is a judges job to “interpret and apply the laws of SimDemocracy,” which does not leave room for a judge to make up their own sentences where the law is clear (no matter how good their intentions).

[4] The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to commit aggravated doxxing. The available sentences for conspiracy are “shall be the same as for the crime that was conspired,” and the sentences available for aggravated doxxing are “a ban of permanent duration.” The Sentencing Act passed after the verdict in SD v keepbloxburgsafe [2025] Crim 28 was released, and does not apply to crimes in the first schedule, such as doxxing. Therefore, the only legal sentence for the charge was a permanent ban.

[5] The court must now, then, consider whether the minimum of a permanent ban for aggravated doxxing is “cruel and unusual” or “grossly disproportionate” (which would make it unconstitutional, after the recently passed “Reasonable Amendment”). The court does not believe this to be the case; doxxing, especially done with malice, is one of the most egregious crimes one can commit on SimDemocracy — possibly even rising to the level of real-life criminal conduct. A permanent ban, in these circumstances, is entirely reasonable.

Verdict

[6] The sentence in SD v keepbloxburgsafe [2025] Crim 28 is hereby amended to be the legally mandated permanent ban from SimDemocracy and its associated territories.