[2020] KEHC 1234 (KLR)
The court found that while the offence of stock theft is serious and carries a maximum sentence of fourteen years, the trial court failed to adequately consider the appellant's status as a first offender and his relative youth. Additionally, the stolen cattle had been recovered, and the appellant had already served...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 1234 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Jackson Konhoko Komol; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nanyuki
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 79 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal allowed in part
- Judges
- DW Mbuteti
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Stock Theft, First Offender Consideration
- 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
Jackson Konhoko Komol
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of four years imprisonment for stock theft was manifestly harsh and excessive in the circumstances.
- 2 Whether the trial court failed to consider the appellant's status as a first offender and his youth in sentencing.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that while the offence of stock theft is serious and carries a maximum sentence of fourteen years, the trial court failed to adequately consider the appellant's status as a first offender and his relative youth. Additionally, the stolen cattle had been recovered, and the appellant had already served over two years in custody. The judge held that a custodial sentence of four years was manifestly harsh and excessive in the circumstances. The appropriate sentence was the period already served, which was deemed sufficient punishment for the offence committed.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed in part
Orders
- The sentence of four years imprisonment is set aside and substituted with the period already served.
- The appellant shall be set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NANYUKI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 79 OF 2018
JACKSON KONKOKO KOMOL.................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC....................................................................RESPONDENT
(Appeal from original Sentence dated 26/10/2018 in Nanyuki CM Criminal Case No 124 of 2018 – W J Gichimu, PM)
J U D G M E N T
1. The Appellant herein, JACKSON KONKOKO KOMOL, was convicted after trial of stealing stockcontrary to section 278 of thePenal Code. On 26/10//2018 he was sentenced to serve four (4) years imprisonment.
2. Although the Appellant appealed against both conviction and sentence, at the time of hearing of the appeal he stated categorically that he wished to proceed only with the appeal against sentence.
3. The learned prosecution counsel submitted that he supported the sentence meted out to the Appellant, pointing out that the offence carried a maximum of fourteen (14) years imprisonment.
4. Although the learned magistrate who sentenced the Appellant (he was tried and convicted by a different magistrate) took into account the period that the Appellant had been in custody during his trial and the fact that the five (5) stolen head of cattle had been recovered, he appeared not to have considered him a first offender (which he was). The trial court also appears not to have taken into account the relative youth of the Appellant.
5. The Appellant stated that he is now 25 years old. That means that he was about 23 years old when he was convicted. Everybody deserves a second chance, and a shorter custodial sentence in this case would have met the ends of justice. I consider that the sentence of 4 years imprisonment was manifestly harsh and excessive in the circumstances of this case.
6. The Accused has now already served just over two (2) years and one (1) month in prison. I consider that to be sufficient punishment for the offence committed.
7. I will therefore allow the appeal against sentence by setting aside the 4 years imprisonment meted out, and by substituting therefor the time already served. That means that the Appellant shall be set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. It is so ordered.
DATED AND SIGNED AT NANYUKI THIS 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020
H P G WAWERU
JUDGE
DELIVERED AT NANYUKI THIS 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2020