Case Metadata |
|
Case Number: | Criminal Appeal No.341 Of 2002 |
---|---|
Parties: | Duncan Onyango Okiri v Republic |
Date Delivered: | 01 Dec 2004 |
Case Class: | Criminal |
Court: | High Court at Kisii |
Case Action: | |
Judge(s): | Kaburu Bauni |
Citation: | Okiri v Republic [2004] eKLR |
Case Summary: | Criminal Practice - penology - senrtencing - 8 year jail term found excessively harsh on the charge of stock theft (three goats) for a first offender - conviction quashed and set aside. |
Disclaimer: | The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information |
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KISII
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.341 OF 2002
(From original conviction and sentence of the Resident Magistrate’s Court at
Oyugis
in Criminal Case No.522 of 2002 –N. NJAGI ESQ., S.R.M)
Appellant was convicted by Senior Resident Magistrate Oyugis for the offence of stealing stock contrary to section 278 Penal Code. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 8 years imprisonment.
His appeal is against sentence only. However the learned Senior State Counsel in conceding the appeal pointed out that the plea was equivocal as facts were never read to the appellant. I quite agree. The learned magistrate took the plea in the most casual manner. The charge was a serious one and the sentence meted out long.
Record shows that after reading the charge to the appellant and recording a plea of guilty the magistrate recorded: “FACTS R.A.P.C.5.” That is not a proper way of recording facts. The prosecution should have read the facts to the appellant who should have been asked if he agreed with them or not. On that note alone the appeal will succeed.
The above aside the sentence meted out was excessive. Appellant was alleged to have stolen 3 goats worth shs.2,900/=. He was a first offender and pleaded for leniency. Sentence of 8 years imprisonment was excessive and harsh in the circumstances.
I allow the appeal quash the conviction and set aside the sentence. Appellant be set at liberty forthwith.
Dated 1st December 2004