[2004] KECA 104 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal held that the sentence of eight years imposed for manslaughter was lawful and within the discretion of the sentencing judge. The appellant failed to demonstrate that the sentence was manifestly harsh or severe, or that the judge considered irrelevant matters or failed to consider relevant ones....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KECA 104 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Francis Maina Mwangi alias Kaini; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 93 of 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Manslaughter, Sentencing Discretion, Plea of Guilty
- 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
Francis Maina Mwangi alias Kaini
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of eight years for manslaughter was manifestly harsh or severe to warrant interference by the appellate court.
- 2 Whether the sentencing judge considered irrelevant matters or failed to consider relevant matters in imposing sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal held that the sentence of eight years imposed for manslaughter was lawful and within the discretion of the sentencing judge. The appellant failed to demonstrate that the sentence was manifestly harsh or severe, or that the judge considered irrelevant matters or failed to consider relevant ones. As such, there was no basis for appellate interference, and the appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is hereby dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAKURU
CRIMINALAPPEAL NO .93 OF 2003
BETWEEN
FRANCIS MAINA MWANGI alias KAINI ………………………. APPELLANT
AND
REPUBLIC …..……………………………………………………….. RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
The appellant pleaded guilty to and was convicted of the offence of manslaughter contrary to section 205 of the Penal Code and upon his unequivocal plea and after taking into account all matters relevant to the issue of sentence, the learned Judge imposed on him a sentence of eight years. He now comes to this Court by way of this appeal which is basically a plea for mercy. The sentence imposed by the Judge was lawful and the issue of sentence is really a matter for the discretion of the sentencing court. We are unable to say that the sentence imposed is so harsh or so severe that we must interfere. Nor has it been shown that the learned Judge, in imposing the sentence took into account an irrelevant matter or failed to take into account a relevant matter.
There is no basis upon which we can interfere with the sentence and we order that this appeal be and is hereby dismissed.
Dated and delivered at Nakuru this 21st day of September, 2004.
R. S. C. OMOLO ---------------------------
JUDGE OF APPEAL
E. O. O’KUBASU ----------------------------
JUDGE OF APPEAL
E. M. GITHINJI -----------------------------
JUDGE OFAPPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR