[2011] KECA 414 (KLR)

[2011] KECA 414 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that the appellant was properly convicted on his own plea of guilty for two counts of burglary and stealing. The trial magistrate correctly imposed sentences of 18 months imprisonment on each count, with the sentences to run consecutively because the offences were committed on different...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] KECA 414 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Everest Ochieng Were; Respondent: Republic
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal 283 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Affirming Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed with clarification on sentence
Legal Topics
Burglary, Stealing, Sentencing, Plea of Guilty
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Burglary Stealing Sentencing Plea of Guilty

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Everest Ochieng Were

Appellant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Affirming Conviction and Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the trial court properly sentenced the appellant on both counts and whether the sentences should run consecutively or concurrently.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's understanding of the total sentence imposed was correct.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the appellant was properly convicted on his own plea of guilty for two counts of burglary and stealing. The trial magistrate correctly imposed sentences of 18 months imprisonment on each count, with the sentences to run consecutively because the offences were committed on different dates. The total sentence to be served is therefore 36 months, not 72 months as misunderstood by the appellant. The appellate court found no basis to interfere with the sentence, as it was neither harsh nor excessive, and the trial court had exercised its discretion properly. The appeal was dismissed save for the clarification of the total sentence to be served.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with clarification on sentence

Orders

  • The appellant will serve 18 months imprisonment on each count, sentences to run consecutively for a total of 36 months from 9th November, 2009.
  • Appeal otherwise dismissed.