[2010] KEHC 3156 (KLR)
The court held that it lacks the jurisdiction under section 354 of the Criminal Procedure Code to consolidate separate criminal appeals or to order sentences from different cases to run concurrently, as the offences were committed separately and relate to different cases. The application was therefore dismissed for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 3156 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Erick Chebon Nalekem; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 172 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Application to Consolidate Appeals and for Concurrent Sentences
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- SP Ouko
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Procedure, Sentencing, Concurrent Sentences
- 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
Erick Chebon Nalekem
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Application to Consolidate Appeals and for Concurrent Sentences
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court can consolidate separate criminal appeals and order sentences to run concurrently.
- 2 Whether section 354 of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers the court to grant the orders sought by the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that it lacks the jurisdiction under section 354 of the Criminal Procedure Code to consolidate separate criminal appeals or to order sentences from different cases to run concurrently, as the offences were committed separately and relate to different cases. The application was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application to consolidate appeals and for sentences to run concurrently is dismissed.
- The appellant is to be given an opportunity to indicate how he wishes to proceed with the substantive appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU
Criminal Appeal 172 of 2008
ERICK CHEBON NALEKEM…………….……APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC……………………………………..RESPONDENT
RULING
Although the appellant through counsel filed this appeal challenging the decision in Chief Magistrate’s Criminal Case No.1211 of 2006, when the appeal came up for hearing, the appellant indicated that he wished to proceed without counsel. Upon being allowed to so proceed without counsel, he made an unusual application, that is, whether the court could consolidate this appeal with H.C.CR. Appeal Nos.221of 2007 and 109 of 2007 and that after consolidation, if the court could order the sentences to run concurrently. The appellant referred to the case of Michael Obor Vs. Republic, High Court Criminal Appeal Nos.960 of 1991, 919 of 1991 and 1214 of 1996.
In this appeal, the appellant was sentenced to two years, in Criminal Appeal No.221/2007 to 4 years and in Criminal Appeal No.109/2007, to 5 years a total of 11 years. The effect of allowing this application would be a sentence of five (5) years. This kind of
H.C.CR.A.NO.172/08
application is not covered by the provisions of section 354 of the Criminal Procedure Code which provides for the powers of this court in appeals from the subordinate court.
Secondly the sentences relate to three different cases which cannot be consolidated as the offences are alleged to have been committed separately. I was unable to get the cases referred to by the appellant hence I cannot say what was decided.
The application has no merit and is dismissed. Since the appellant has not addressed me on this appeal, he will be given an opportunity to indicate what he intends to do with it.
Dated, Signed and Delivered at Nakuru this 5th day of March, 2010.
W. OUKO
JUDGE