[2015] KEHC 259 (KLR)
The High Court found that the trial, conviction, and sentence imposed on the appellant were proper. The sentence of nine years imprisonment for the offence of maim under Section 234 of the Penal Code was not manifestly harsh or excessive, considering the seriousness of the offence and the statutory maximum of life...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 259 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Clinton Ongworo Getande; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyamira
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 3 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- CB Nagillah
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Appeals Against Sentence, Maim Offence, First Offender Consideration
- 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
Clinton Ongworo Getande
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed for the offence of maim was manifestly harsh or excessive.
- 2 Whether the trial court properly exercised its discretion in sentencing the appellant.
- 3 Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the trial, conviction, and sentence imposed on the appellant were proper. The sentence of nine years imprisonment for the offence of maim under Section 234 of the Penal Code was not manifestly harsh or excessive, considering the seriousness of the offence and the statutory maximum of life imprisonment. The trial court exercised its discretion appropriately, and there was no basis for the appellate court to interfere with the sentence. The appeal was therefore dismissed in its entirety.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The petition of appeal is dismissed.
- The conviction and sentence of the trial court are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
38 paragraphs
No. 7 of 2015
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYAMIRA
MISC. APPLICATION NO. 3 OF 2015
CLINTON OGWORO GETANDE……….......……….….APPELLANT
=VERSUS=
REPUBLIC………………….………………….……..RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
This is a Criminal Appeal by an unrepresented appellant, Clinton Ongworo Getande. He was charged with an offence of maim contrary to Section 234 of the Penal Code. The particulars were that on 2nd day of January, 2013 at Gekonge sub-location in Masaba South District within Kisii County jointly with others not before court unlawfully did maim to Christopher Monene Otieno.
He pleaded not guilty to the charge and was duly tried at Keroka Resident Magistrate’s Court. He was duly convicted under Section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code and sentenced to serve 9 years imprisonment.
He has now appealed against the sentence.
He sets out the following grounds in his petition of appeal:-
That I was convicted for nine years for the offence of maim.
That the trial magistrate was not lenient in pronouncing the years when the appellants’ mitigation was eliminated.
That I am married and have two siblings.
That I have reformed for a short period.
That am convicted for nine years and will lead to separation with my family.
That I am a first offender hence be given a chance to liberty and exercise my duty as a Christian.
That may the court reduce a lesser punishment.
That my lord, I pray to be present at the hearing of this appeal and wish to be furnished with certified copy of proceedings.
In essence he seeks to quash both the conviction and the sentence as his prayer although the appeal is on sentence only.
The appellant’s submissions
He relied solely on his written petition as filed.
The Respondent’s submissions
The respondent opposes the appeal. He urges the court to uphold sentence as the said sentence is commensurate with the offence with which he is charged. The offence is causing grevious bodily harm, contrary to Section 234 of the Penal Code. The penalty for that offence is life imprisonment. The case went to full trial; the prosecution availed six (6) witnesses. The accused was found guilty of the said offence upon prosecution proving its case beyond reasonable doubt. It was Criminal Case No. 86 of 2013.
As to whether there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction, this court, as this the first appellate court, is enjoined to consider the entire evidence, evaluate it and reach an independent conclusion bearing in mind that that it neither heard nor saw the witnesses testify. (See Okeno vs Republic [1972] E.A 32.
In respect touching on sentence, this court will interfere with the exercise of such discretion by the trial court when the sentence is manifestly harsh or extremely lenient. The court will also interfere where the sentence is established that the sentence was illegal. (See Griffith vs Republic 1981 KLR 121.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
This court finds that the trial, the conviction and the sentence meted out on appellant in Criminal Case No. 86 of 2013 was proper.
Therefore the petition presented to this court be and is hereby dismissed.
It is so ordered.
Dated and delivered at Nyamira on this 19thday of October 2015
C. B. NAGILLAH
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Appellant in personfor the appellant
Malesifor the respondent
MercyCourt Clerk