[2002] KEHC 45 (KLR)
The court found that both offences of uttering and stealing were committed in the course of the same transaction. Therefore, in accordance with established sentencing principles, the sentences for these offences should run concurrently to reflect the unity of the criminal conduct and to avoid double punishment for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2002] KEHC 45 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Aggrey Mageni Kipimboli; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 990 of 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Sentences to run concurrently.
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Concurrent Sentences, Stealing, Uttering False Documents
- 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
Aggrey Mageni Kipimboli
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentences for uttering and stealing, committed in the same transaction, should run concurrently or consecutively.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that both offences of uttering and stealing were committed in the course of the same transaction. Therefore, in accordance with established sentencing principles, the sentences for these offences should run concurrently to reflect the unity of the criminal conduct and to avoid double punishment for related acts. The judge ordered that the sentences of 2½ years imprisonment for uttering and 3 years imprisonment for stealing do run concurrently.
Court Disposition
Sentences to run concurrently.
Orders
- The sentences of 2½ years imprisonment and 3 years imprisonment are to run concurrently.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.990 OF 2000
(From Original Conviction and Sentence in Criminal Case No.2387 of 1998
of the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Nairobi).
AGGREY MAGENI KIPIMBOLI……………………………APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC…………………………………………………RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
I note that both offences of uttering and stealing were omitted in the course of the same transaction.
I order that the sentences of 2½ years imprisonment and 3 years imprisonment do run concurrently.
V.V. PATELJUDGE12/2/2002