[2013] KEHC 1412 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was not remorseful and, according to the probation officer's report, was unsuitable for a community service order. Given the gravity of the offence—entering a dwelling with intent to commit a felony—and the risk to the applicant's safety if released, the court held that a custodial...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 1412 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Geoffrey Kiplangat Kibet; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kericho
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 189 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- Application for revision declined; conviction and sentence upheld.
- Judges
- B Ongaya
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Community Service Orders, Revision of 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
Geoffrey Kiplangat Kibet
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the custodial sentence imposed on the applicant should be revised to a community service order.
- 2 Whether the applicant is suitable for a community service order given the probation officer's report.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was not remorseful and, according to the probation officer's report, was unsuitable for a community service order. Given the gravity of the offence—entering a dwelling with intent to commit a felony—and the risk to the applicant's safety if released, the court held that a custodial sentence was appropriate for rehabilitation and protection of both the applicant and the community. The application for revision was therefore declined, and the original conviction and sentence were upheld.
Court Disposition
Application for revision declined; conviction and sentence upheld.
Orders
- The conviction and sentence by the trial court are upheld.
- The application for a community service order is declined.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KERICHO
REVISION NO. 189 OF 2013
(Being A Revision in the Conviction and Sentence on 10. 09. 2013 by the Honourable V. Karanja Acting Senior Resident Magistrate at Bomet in Criminal Case No. 831 of 2013)
GEOFFREY KIPLANGAT KIBET....................APPLICANT
-VERSUS-
REPUBLIC.................................................RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 18th October, 2013)
RULING ON REVISION
This is the ruling in an application for revision under Sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, Chapter 75 of the Laws of Kenya, and under Section 8(2) of the Community Service Orders Act, 1998. The applicant is Geoffrey Kiplangat Kibet who was charged with the offences of entering into a dwelling with intent to commit a felony contrary to Section 305 (1) of the Penal Code, Chapter 63, Laws of Kenya in Criminal case No. 831 of 2013 in the Acting Senior Resident Magistrate’s Court at Bomet.
The applicant pleaded guilty as charged and the learned trial magistrate on 10. 09. 2013 convicted and sentenced him to serve two years imprisonment.
The probation officer had filed a report prior to the sentence by the trial court. The report indicated that the applicant was an adopted child and as a young man, his community was hostile against him in view of his repeated criminal behaviour in the company of his peers. His family’s position was that custodial rehabilitation was the best in the circumstances because all other avenues would not serve him and the community would likely lynch him if he was set free to the society.
Following the present application the probation officer has filed another report which indicates that the applicant is not remorseful and is therefore not suitable for a community service order.
The court has considered the report by the probation officer and the gravity of the offence. It is the court’s opinion that the custodial sentence is appropriate towards civilising the applicant through rehabilitation into a disciplined, responsible and law abiding citizen.
In conclusion, the conviction and sentence by the honourable trial court is upheld as the application for the community service order is declined.
Signed, datedanddeliveredin court atKerichothisFriday, 18th October, 2013.
BYRAM ONGAYA
JUDGE