[2016] KEHC 783 (KLR)
The court found that the objectives of sentencing—deterrence, denunciation, rehabilitation, and retribution—had been achieved in the appellant's case. The appellant was a first offender, pleaded guilty, expressed genuine remorse, and demonstrated a willingness to reform. Additionally, the court observed that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 783 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Dominic Letikikwan; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nanyuki
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 63 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed; sentence set aside; appellant to be released unless otherwise lawfully held
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Appeal Against Sentence, First Offender, Remorse and Rehabilitation
- 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
Dominic Letikikwan
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of 4 years imprisonment imposed on the appellant, a first offender who pleaded guilty, was excessive or warranted.
- 2 Whether the appellant's health and remorsefulness justified a reduction or alteration of the sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the objectives of sentencing—deterrence, denunciation, rehabilitation, and retribution—had been achieved in the appellant's case. The appellant was a first offender, pleaded guilty, expressed genuine remorse, and demonstrated a willingness to reform. Additionally, the court observed that the appellant was in poor health, which made continued imprisonment inappropriate. The court concluded that further incarceration would not serve the interests of justice or the purposes of sentencing. Consequently, the sentence of four years imprisonment was set aside and substituted with a sentence equivalent to the period already served, resulting in the appellant's immediate...
Court Disposition
appeal allowed; sentence set aside; appellant to be released unless otherwise lawfully held
Orders
- The appellant's sentence of 4 years imprisonment is set aside.
- The appellant is sentenced to serve imprisonment for the period already served.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYAAT NANYUKI
CRIMINAL APPEAL. NO. 63 OF 2016
DOMINIC LETIRIKWAN.................................................. APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC...................................................................RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the original conviction and sentence in Maralal Principal Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No. 199 of 2015 by Hon. B.S Khapoya Senior Resident Magistrate on 23rd February, 2015)
JUDGMENT
1. DOMINIC LETIKIKWANwas charged with the offence of breaking into a building and committing a felony Contrary to Section 306 (a) of the Penal Code. He pleaded guilty to that offence and was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment. He now files this appeal against that sentence.
2. The appeal was opposed by the Senior Prosecution Counsel Mr. Tanui. Learned Counsel submitted that the appellant’s sentence was deserving even though he did not have previous conviction. That the trial court in passing the sentence noted that those offences were rampant in Maralal town.
3. Appellant relied on his written and oral submissions. He stated in his written submissions that this was the first offence he had ever been charged with. That he pleaded guilty before the trial court. That he was remorseful of what he did and that his time in jail had taught him that crime does not pay. He stated in this regard;
“I will never again in my life engage in any law breaking (sic) or associate myself with law breakers.”
Orally before court he submitted that he was sickly and in this regard handed to the court his treatment notes which indeed confirm that he had received medical treatment. I also observed that he looked sickly.
4. In the case REPUBLIC V JAGANI & ANOTHER[2001] KLR 590the court considered the purpose of sentencing and stated;
“The purpose of a sentence is usually to disapprove or denounce unlawful conduct as a deterrent to deter the offender from committing the offence, to separate offenders from society if necessary to assist in rehabilitation of offenders, and in retribution by providing for reparation for harm done to victims in particular and to society in general. It is also seen as promoting a source of responsibility in offenders.”
5. In my view the above purpose has been achieved in the case of the appellant. Much more appellant looks sickly and prison, right now, is not for his good.
6. For the above reasons the appellants appeal against sentence is allowed. His sentence is hereby set aside. He is sentenced to serve imprisonment for the period he has already. I order the appellant to be set free from custody unless he is otherwise lawfully held.
Dated and Delivered at Nanyuki this 19th December, 2016
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Coram
Before Justice Mary Kasango
Court Assistant: ……………….
Appellant: Dominic Letikikwan
For state: …………………………
COURT
Judgment delivered in open court
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE