[2012] KEHC 3386 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant fully understood the facts as stated at the trial court and that there was no ambiguity in the plea. There was no evidence to support the appellant's claims of police beating or threats. The theft was found to have been carefully executed by the appellant. The sentence of 14 years...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 3386 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: George Okoth Chiwjo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 132 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- HK Chemitei
- Legal Topics
- Stock Theft, Plea of Guilt, Sentencing Principles, Handling Stolen Property
- 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
George Okoth Chiwjo
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant's plea of guilt was unequivocal and voluntary.
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was lawful and appropriate in the circumstances.
- 3 Whether there was any evidence of police misconduct affecting the plea.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant fully understood the facts as stated at the trial court and that there was no ambiguity in the plea. There was no evidence to support the appellant's claims of police beating or threats. The theft was found to have been carefully executed by the appellant. The sentence of 14 years was within the statutory maximum, but the court noted that five years would have been sufficient in the circumstances. However, the appeal was dismissed as the conviction and sentence were lawful and proper. The alternative charge of handling stolen property was not considered, as the appellant was found guilty on the principal charge.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT
AT KISUMU
Criminal Appeal 132 of 2011
GEORGE OKOTH CHIWJO…………………………………………………..………APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC………………………………...…………………………………..……RESPONDENT
(From original conviction and sentence from the Senior Resident Magistrate’s court at Siaya Court Criminal no. 1690 of 2010)
J U D G M E N T
The appellant herein George Okoth Chiwjo was charged with the offences of stealing stock contrary to section 278 of the Penal Code.
The particulars are that on the night of 17th – 18th December, 2010 at Howe sub location in Siaya district within Siaya County, stole one cow (Bull) valued at Kshs. 15,000/= the property of Lodvick Ouma Odera.
He was further charged with handling suspected stolen property contrary to section 322 of the Penal Code.
The particulars are that on the 18th December 2010 at Komolo sub location in Siaya district within Siaya County otherwise than in the course of stealing dishonestly handled one cow (bull) knowing or having reasons to believe it to be stolen goods or unlawfully obtained.
The appellant on his own plea of guilt was sentenced to serve 14 years imprisonment. He has appealed citing the following grounds:-
1. That when I was arrested I was beaten by the police which led to a state of confusion when the charge was read.
2. That I was misled by the police not knowing the dangers of this offence.
3. That I have a wife and three children and I am the bread winner.
4. That I was not in a position to know that cattle were stolen since I used to escort the cattle to the market as a job.
5. That I pray for leniency as I am a layman and I never understood the ingredients of the charge.
6. That I wish to be present at the hearing of this appeal.
The state opposed the appeal arguing that the sentence was sufficient and they do not wish that the same be enhanced.
I have gone through the petition of appeal as well as the facts as stated at the trial court. The appellant fully understood the same. There was no ambiguity at all.
There is no proof that the appellant was beaten by the police nor was there any threats at all.
The theft was carefully executed by the appellant. Consequently, I shall dismiss the appeal. The maximum period for this offence is 14 years. Five years in the circumstances is sufficient.
Having found the appellant guilty on the principal charge this court need not consider the alternative charge of handling suspected stolen property.
The appeal is otherwise dismissed.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kisumu this 9th day of July, 2012.
H.K. CHEMITEI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
………………………………..for the state
……………………….for the respondent
HKC/va