[2010] KEHC 1719 (KLR)
The court found that although the sentence of seven years imprisonment was lawful under Section 278 of the Penal Code, it was harsh given the circumstances: the appellant was a first offender, pleaded guilty, the stolen cow was recovered, and he saved judicial time. The trial court failed to adequately consider...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 1719 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Danson Njeru Mkirema; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 295 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal_allowed_in_part
- Judges
- JV Juma
- Legal Topics
- Plea of Guilty, Sentencing Principles, Mitigation, Stock Theft, Handling Stolen Property
- 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
Danson Njeru Mkirema
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of seven years imprisonment for stock theft was harsh and excessive in the circumstances.
- 2 Whether the trial court properly considered mitigation and alternatives to imprisonment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the sentence of seven years imprisonment was lawful under Section 278 of the Penal Code, it was harsh given the circumstances: the appellant was a first offender, pleaded guilty, the stolen cow was recovered, and he saved judicial time. The trial court failed to adequately consider alternatives to imprisonment, such as a fine or probation. The High Court therefore set aside the custodial sentence and substituted it with a fine of Kshs. 8,000, or in default, two years imprisonment, with the sentence to run from the date of conviction by the lower court.
Court Disposition
appeal_allowed_in_part
Orders
- The seven year sentence imposed by the lower court is set aside.
- The appellant is sentenced to a fine of Kshs. 8,000 or, in default, two years imprisonment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA
CRIMINAL APPEAL 295 OF 2008
DANSON NJERU MKIREMA............... APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC .......................................... RESPONDENT
JUDGEMENT
The Appellant herein DANSON NJERU MKIREMA, has filed this appeal against his conviction and sentence before the Resident Magistrate’s Court at Wundanyi.The Appellant had been charged with the offence of STEALING STOCK CONTRARY TO SECTION 278 OF THE PENAL CODE.In addition he faced an alternative charge ofHANDLING STOLEN PROPERTY CONTRARY TO SECTION 322(2) OF THE PENAL CODE.
On 25th March 2008 the Appellant was arraigned before the learned Resident Magistrate and the charges were read out to him in Kiswahili.The Appellant responded by saying
“Ni kweli”
i.e. That is true
Thereafter the prosecutor read out the facts to him to which the Appellant responded
“The facts are correct”
thereby maintaining his plea of guilty.The trial magistrate proceeded to convict the Appellant on his own plea of guilty in accordance with the provisions of S. 207(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.After listening to his mitigation the court sentenced the Appellant to serve seven (7) years imprisonment.
I have perused the written submissions filed by the Appellant and I note that he does not raise issue with his conviction.The Appellant is basically offering mitigation and appeals against his sentence which he terms harsh and excessive.As I have already stated earlier I am satisfied that the plea was properly taken and that the proceedings were conducted in a language which the Appellant understood well.S. 278 of the Penal Code provides for a maximum sentence of fourteen (14) years imprisonment for theft of livestock.In this case a single cow was stolen,the same was recovered and was exhibited in court.The Appellant pleaded guilty thereby saving the court’s time and doing away with an unnecessary trial.The Appellant was a first offender.In view of all the above factors I do agree with the Appellant that a seven (7) year sentence though lawful was harsh in the circumstances.The trial court ought to have considered an alternative like a fine or probation etc.The appeal against sentence succeeds.I hereby set aside the seven (7) year sentence imposed upon the Appellant.I substitute a fine of Kshs.8,000/- in default he will serve two (2) years in prison.Sentence to run from the date of his conviction by the lower court.
Dated and Delivered in Mombasa this 12th day of July 2010.
M. ODERO
JUDGE
Read in open court in the presence of:-
M. Ondari for State
Appellant in person
M. ODERO
JUDGE
12/07/2010