[2003] KEHC 454 (KLR)
Given the low value of the property stolen, the appellant's plea to the lesser offence of theft, the lack of opposition from the state, the period already served in custody, and the appellant's poor health, the court found it just to substitute the conviction for robbery with violence with a conviction for theft....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2003] KEHC 454 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: David Mutua Mumina; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 1376 of ??
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part; conviction for robbery with violence quashed and substituted with conviction for theft; appellant to be released forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
- Legal Topics
- Robbery With Violence, Theft, Sentencing, 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
David Mutua Mumina
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction and sentence for robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code was proper.
- 2 Whether the appellant's plea to a lesser offence of theft under section 275 of the Penal Code should be accepted.
- 3 Whether the period already served by the appellant constituted sufficient punishment for the substituted offence.
Ratio Decidendi
Given the low value of the property stolen, the appellant's plea to the lesser offence of theft, the lack of opposition from the state, the period already served in custody, and the appellant's poor health, the court found it just to substitute the conviction for robbery with violence with a conviction for theft. The court held that the sentence already served was sufficient punishment for the substituted offence and ordered the appellant's immediate release unless otherwise lawfully held.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part; conviction for robbery with violence quashed and substituted with conviction for theft; appellant to be released forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
Orders
- Conviction for robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code quashed.
- Conviction for theft under section 275 of the Penal Code substituted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL DIVISION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1376 OF 2000
(From Original Conviction and Sentence in Criminal Case 19782 of 1999 of the Principal Magistrate’s Court at Makadara)
DAVID MUTUA MUMINA……………………………….. APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………………………….. RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
The appellant filed an appeal challenging his conviction and sentence in a charge of Robbery contrary to section 296 (2) of the Penal Code. The particulars of the charge were that on the 20th day of October 1999 at Majengo in Nairobi within Nairobi area, jointly with others not before the court while armed with knives and iron bars robbed Peter Aluku of cash 800/= and a pair of shoes valued at 200/= all valued at Ksh.1,000/= and at or immediately after the time of the said robbery used actual violence on the said Aluku Wafuho. The appellant was convicted and sentence to death by the learned trial magistrate one C. Rinjeu Esquire.
At the time of hearing this appeal the appellant offered to plead guilty to a lesser offence of theft contrary to S.275 of the Penal Code. Mr. Okello for the state did not oppose the appellant’s offer.
We have had a chance to peruse the proceedings. We have noted the low value of subject matter that was stolen according to the charge sheet we have no reason to reject that offer made by the appellant and which has been accepted by the state. We have noted that the appellant was sentenced on 20/9/2000 and has now served about 2 ½ years jail sentence. We have further noted that the appellant now looks very sickly. It is on the above stated grounds that we find that the appellant has served sufficient jail sentence for substituted offence. We order that the appellant should be released forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
Order accordingly.
Delivered in open court in the presence of the parties.
M. MSAGHA
JUDGE
27/3/2003
R.M. MUTITU
JUDGE
25/3/2003