[2017] KEHC 7791 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant's plea of guilty was unequivocal, as the facts were read to him and he confirmed their correctness. However, the sentence imposed was the maximum allowed by law, and the appellant was a first offender who used only his fists and no weapon. The court held that, in the circumstances,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 7791 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Galgalo Adan; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Marsabit
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 1 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal_partially_allowed
- Judges
- KW Kiarie
- Legal Topics
- Assault Causing Actual Bodily Harm, Plea of Guilty, Sentencing Principles, Appeal on Sentence
- 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
Galgalo Adan
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plea of guilty was unequivocal.
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was lawful and/or excessive.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant's plea of guilty was unequivocal, as the facts were read to him and he confirmed their correctness. However, the sentence imposed was the maximum allowed by law, and the appellant was a first offender who used only his fists and no weapon. The court held that, in the circumstances, the sentence was excessive. The sentence was therefore reduced to two years imprisonment from the date of the original sentence.
Court Disposition
appeal_partially_allowed
Orders
- The sentence of five years imprisonment is set aside and substituted with a sentence of two years imprisonment from the date of the original sentence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MARSABIT
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 01 OF 2016
GALGALO ADAN......................APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC.............................RESPONDENT
(From the original conviction and sentence in criminal case No. 909 of 2014 of the Principal Magistrate’s Court at Marsabit by BOAZ M OMBEWA– Ag. Principal Magistrate)
JUDGMENT
The appellant,GALGALO ADAN, was charged with an offence of assault causing actual bodily harm contrary to section 251 of the Penal Code.
The particulars of the offences were that on 20th November 2014 at Marsabit G.K prison in Marsabit County, unlawfully assaulted SALAD GODANA occasioning him actual bodily harm.
He pleaded guilty to the offence. He was convicted and sentenced to five years imprisonment.
He now appeals against both the conviction and sentence.
The state opposed the appeal through Mr. Chirchir, the learned counsel.
The facts of the prosecution case were briefly as follows:
On the 20. 11. 2014 the complainant was taking his breakfast at the Marsabit G.K Prison. When the appellant passed where the complainant was seated, his porridge poured on the appellant. The appellant was irritated by this and assaulted the complainant.
The appellant having pleaded guilty, it is not open to him to raise grounds that touch on facts. He is estopped by section 348 of the Criminal Procedure Act from doing so. It provides:
No appeal shall be allowed in the case of an accused person who has pleaded guilty and has been convicted on that plea by a subordinate court, except as to the extent or legality of the sentence.
In the instant case, I will endeavour to establish whether the plea was unequivocal and whether the sentence meted out was lawful and whether it was excessive.
I have perused the original record and the typed copy of proceedings. I have noted that after the appellant pleaded guilty to the offence, the facts were read and he confirmed that they were correct. The plea was unequivocal.
Section 251 of the Penal Code provides as follows:
Any person who commits an assault occasioning actual bodily harm is guilty of a misdemeanour and is liable to imprisonment for five years.
The appellant was sentenced to the maximum penalty provided by the law. Being a first offender, the sentence was on the higher side. After factoring in the fact that he never used a weapon, other than his fist, in the attack, I will reduce the sentence to two years imprisonment from the date he was sentenced by the trial court. To this extent his appeal succeed.
DATED at Marsabit this 22nd day of February 2017
KIARIE WAWERU KIARIE
JUDGE