[2003] KEHC 920 (KLR)
The court found that although the offences were serious, the quantity of cannabis sativa involved in count 2 was not substantial enough to justify the severity of the sentence imposed. The appellant's guilty plea and first offender status were mitigating factors. Consequently, the court reduced the sentences for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2003] KEHC 920 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Barnabas Omori Omaiko; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 170 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- sentence reduced; appeal on sentence allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Narcotic Offences, Plea of Guilty
- 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
Barnabas Omori Omaiko
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentences imposed for cultivating prohibited plants and unlawful possession of narcotic drugs were excessive in the circumstances.
- 2 Whether the appellant's guilty plea and status as a first offender warranted a reduction in sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the offences were serious, the quantity of cannabis sativa involved in count 2 was not substantial enough to justify the severity of the sentence imposed. The appellant's guilty plea and first offender status were mitigating factors. Consequently, the court reduced the sentences for both counts to four years each, to run concurrently from the date of sentence.
Court Disposition
sentence reduced; appeal on sentence allowed in part
Orders
- Imprisonment in count 1 reduced to four years.
- Imprisonment in count 2 reduced to four years.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
9 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYAAT NAKURUCRIMINAL APPEAL NO.170 OF 2001 (From original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No.970/200 of the Senior Resident Magistrate’s Court at NAROK –W.O. LICHUMA(S.R.M.)
BARNABAS OMORI……………………………….APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC………………………………………….RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
The Appellant BARNABAS OMORI OMAIKO pleaded guilty to two counts. Count One being of CULTIVATING PROHIBITED PLANTS contrary to section 6(a) of the Narcotics Drugs and Phychotropic Substances Control Act.
Count 2 was UNLAWFULLY BEING IN POSSESSION OF NARCOTICS DRUGS contrary to Section 3(1) of the same Act. He was convicted and sentenced to five years imprisonment in the first count and eight years imprisonment in the second count. In his submissions he urged court to reduce the term of imprisonment imposed on grounds he had pleaded guilty to the charge and also on account of his family which solely depended on him. He also submitted that since the imprisonment he had reformed and pledged that he would never repeat the offence.
The Learned Counsel for the State opposed the appeal submitting that the offence was serious and sentences were lenient. I did consider the submission by both sides. Indeed the offence was serious. However, the amount of plant cannabis sativa involved in count 2 was not so much as to call for such a severe sentence. In addition the Appellant was treated as a first offender. I will allow the appeal on sentence by reducing the imprisonment in count 1 to four years and in count 2 to four years. Both terms should run concurrently from date of sentence.
Orders accordingly. Dated and delivered at Nakuru this 21st day of May, 2003.
JESSIE LESIIT JUDGE