[2015] KEHC 2328 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 2328 (KLR)

The court found that the sentence of two years imprisonment imposed on the applicant, a first offender convicted of possession of cannabis sativa, was within the statutory maximum of ten years and could not be considered harsh or excessive. The court further held that there was no illegality, impropriety, or...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 2328 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Feisal Mohamed Saburi; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Revision 165 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
GO Shikwe
Legal Topics
Sentencing Principles, Revision Jurisdiction, Narcotic Drugs Offences
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentencing Principles Revision Jurisdiction Narcotic Drugs Offences

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Feisal Mohamed Saburi

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of two years imprisonment without the option of a fine for a first offender convicted of possession of narcotic drugs was harsh or excessive.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court erred in law or procedure in sentencing the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the sentence of two years imprisonment imposed on the applicant, a first offender convicted of possession of cannabis sativa, was within the statutory maximum of ten years and could not be considered harsh or excessive. The court further held that there was no illegality, impropriety, or incorrectness in the sentence or conviction as passed by the trial magistrate. Consequently, there was no basis for the High Court to interfere with the conviction or sentence under its revisionary jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for revision is disallowed.
  • The conviction and sentence of the trial court are upheld.