[2021] KEHC 6067 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant pleaded guilty to the charge of grievous harm, admitted the facts as presented by the prosecution, and was accordingly convicted and sentenced. The grounds of appeal challenging the sufficiency of evidence and fairness of the trial were dismissed as the plea of guilty was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 6067 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Abdirizack Adan Mire; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Garissa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 9 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- A Ali-Aroni
- Legal Topics
- Grievous Harm, Plea of Guilty, Sentencing, Fair Trial Rights
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Abdirizack Adan Mire
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction based on the appellant's guilty plea was proper.
- 2 Whether the sentence of 20 years imprisonment was excessive or warranted reduction.
- 3 Whether the appellant was denied a fair hearing under Article 50 of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant pleaded guilty to the charge of grievous harm, admitted the facts as presented by the prosecution, and was accordingly convicted and sentenced. The grounds of appeal challenging the sufficiency of evidence and fairness of the trial were dismissed as the plea of guilty was unequivocal and voluntary. The appellant's history of violence and substance abuse, as well as previous lenient sentences, justified the 20-year sentence. The court held that there was no basis to interfere with the sentence, and the appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The sentence of 20 years imprisonment is upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT GARISSA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 9 OF 2020
ABDIRIZACK ADAN MIRE...........................................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC.....................................................................................RESPONDENT
(Being An appeal from the decision of Honourable D.W. Mbuteti, Resident Magistrate, in Chief Magistrates Court Criminal Case No. 844 of 2019)
JUDGEMENT
1. The Appellant was charged with the offence of grievous harm contrary to section 234 of the Penal Code.
The particulars of the offence being that on the 30th of October, 2019 at around 15. 30 hrs at Ngamia road area in Garissa township within Garissa County, unlawfully caused grievous harm to Sangama Ali Yarehow.
2. The Appellant pleaded guilty to the offence and was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment.
3. The facts of the case which the Appellant equally admitted are that on the material day the appellant asked his aged mother for money to buy khat and when she failed to provide the same, he threatened to kill her, took a knife and stabbed the mother with the said knife on her left arm.
4. Despite the Appellant pleading guilty he was dissatisfied with the conviction and appealed to this court on grounds that the trial court:
a. Relied on insufficient and contradictory evidence.
b. The court relied on circumstantial evidence.
c. He was denied fair hearing in line with Article 50 of the Kenyan Constitution 2010 and
d. The case was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
5. All the above grounds are ill advised as the Appellant pleaded guilty to the offence, convicted and accordingly sentenced. The said grounds of appeal are doomed to fail, which they hereby do.
6. At the point of hearing of the appeal, the Appellant did not speak to his grounds of appeal but sought for reduction of his sentence stating that he is epileptic and was unable to explain himself at the trial.
7. The State opposed the Appeal on grounds that the conviction was based on the appellant’s own admission and the sentence was lawful and lenient. The state urged that the appeal be dismissed.
8. From the record the Appellant has previously harassed his family members including his father and mother. Indeed, he assaulted his mother twice. The appellant is said to abuse substance.
9. The Appellant in my view is a danger to those who are close to him and indeed the society at large. He was not a first offender either. The shorter sentences previously meted out to him did not deter him from his unbecoming and harmful behaviour. He does not deserve mercy.
10. Based on the above, the court finds the sentence appropriate in the circumstances and does not see any reason to interfere with the same.
11. Appeal is therefore dismissed.
DELIVERED AND SIGNED AT GARISSA THIS 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021.
……………….………………
ALI-ARONI
JUDGE