[1991] KECA 4 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge did not have the benefit of full mitigation, particularly the appellant's explanation of provocation by the deceased, due to the lack of legal representation. The abusive words allegedly used by the deceased and the appellant's personal circumstances were significant...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1991] KECA 4 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Andhiro; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 80 of 1990
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced
- Judges
- JRO Masime, AM Cockar
- Legal Topics
- Manslaughter, Sentencing Principles, Mitigation, Legal Aid, Plea Bargain
- 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
Andhiro
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of 12 years imprisonment for manslaughter was excessive in light of the mitigating circumstances.
- 2 Whether the lack of legal representation for the appellant at trial affected the fairness of the proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge did not have the benefit of full mitigation, particularly the appellant's explanation of provocation by the deceased, due to the lack of legal representation. The abusive words allegedly used by the deceased and the appellant's personal circumstances were significant mitigating factors that should have been considered. The court held that, had these factors been properly brought to the judge's attention, a lesser sentence would have been imposed. Accordingly, the sentence was reduced from 12 years to 8 years imprisonment, effective from the date of the original sentence.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced
Orders
- The sentence of imprisonment is reduced from 12 years to 8 years, effective from the date of the original sentence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA Andhiro v Republic
Court of Appeal, at Kisumu December 2, 1991
Masime, Cockar JJ A & Omolo Ag JA
Criminal Appeal No 80 of 1990
(Appeal from a sentence of the High Court of Kenya at Kisii (Patel J)
dated 8/11/89 in Criminal Case No 49 of 1989)
JUDGEMENT
The appellant was charged with the offence of murder but on the day of the commencement of the trial the appellant offered a plea to the lesser charge and in consequence the charge was reduced to that of manslaughter contrary to section 205 of the Penal Code to which offence, when charged, he pleaded guilty and was convicted accordingly and sentenced to a period of 12 years imprisonment. He has now appealed to this Court against sentence.
Briefly the facts as stated to the Court and accepted by the appellant were that on 17th January, 1988, at about 8. 00 pm at Bondo Primary School the deceased, headmaster of the school, was supervising a test in a class of std VII when the appellant entered the class-room and after complaining briefly of some grievance he drew out a knife from the pocket of his trousers and stabbed the headmaster twice as a result of which the latter died. In his mitigation the appellant had referred to ten commandments, of his having fallen to temptation and of his repentance. He explained about his family and 3 children.
The learned judge had given due consideration to the appellant’s age that he was then 32 years old and to the mitigating factors that the appellant had urged. His grounds of appeal to this Court are more or less the same that he advanced before the Superior Court. He has also promised to rehabilitate himself in order to become a useful member of the society. We have carefully considered the grounds of appeal against the sentence. A deplorable feature that we have noticed was that the appellant was not represented by an advocate in the Superior Court. The appellant was facing a charge of murder before the Superior Court and it is the practice of our courts that in such a case the accused is to be provided with free legal aid. In this case the appellant was not represented by an advocate and yet the judge proceeded to take a plea and finalise the matter. That is not a practice to be encouraged in future. It can lead to an order for retrial. However, the appellant now confirmed to us that he had on his own wished to plead guilty to manslaughter because he had committed the offence. But it is clear that because of lack of legal representation the attention of the judge was not drawn to the charge and caution statement made by the appellant to the police in which he had given his reasons for his violent action. He said therein that the deceased had abused him as a eunuch and a useless man since he had lost his manhood which abuse, the appellant claimed, had infuriated him. He also said that the deceased was much stronger than he was and hence his use of the knife. In our view of the nature if the abuse had come to the attention of the judge then he would not have passed the sentence that he imposed. Being mindful of all the factors involved in this unfortunate killing we reduce the sentence of imprisonment to 8 years effective from the date of the original sentence. To that extent the appeal is allowed. Orders accordingly.
Dated and delivered at Kisumu this 2nd day of December,1991.
JOSEPH RAYMOND MASIME
.............................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
A. M COCKAR
.............................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
RIAGA S OMOLO
............................................
AG. JUDGE OF APPEAL