[2019] KEHC 887 (KLR)
The court found that although the appellant pleaded guilty and did not waste judicial time, the trial court imposed a deterrent sentence without adequately considering his youth, first offender status, remorse, rehabilitation efforts, and the partial recovery of the stolen property. The appellate court determined...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 887 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Jackson Solomon Saitoti; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyahururu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 14 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal_allowed_in_part
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Stock Theft, Plea of Guilty, Mitigating Factors
- 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 Solomon Saitoti
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of 5 years imprisonment for stock theft was excessive in the circumstances.
- 2 Whether the trial court erred by not calling for a pre-sentence report before sentencing the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the appellant pleaded guilty and did not waste judicial time, the trial court imposed a deterrent sentence without adequately considering his youth, first offender status, remorse, rehabilitation efforts, and the partial recovery of the stolen property. The appellate court determined that the sentence of 5 years was excessive in the circumstances and that the period already served was sufficient punishment. The sentence was therefore set aside and substituted with a sentence equivalent to the period already served, resulting in the appellant's immediate release unless otherwise lawfully held.
Court Disposition
appeal_allowed_in_part
Orders
- The sentence of 5 years imprisonment is set aside.
- The appellant is sentenced to the period already served.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYAHURURU
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.14 OF 2018
(Appeal Originating from Nyahururu CM’s Court Cr.No.151 of 2018 by: Hon. O. Momanyi – S.R.M.)
JACKSON SOLOMON SAITOTI.............................................APPELLANT
V E R S U S
REPUBLIC................................................................................RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
Jackson Solomon Saitoti, the appellant, was convicted on his own plea of guilty for the offence of stealing stock contrary to Section 278 of the Penal Code.
The particulars of the charge are that on 18/1/2018 at Manguo area within Nyahururu in Laikipa County, stole ten goats all valued at Kshs.60,000/= the property of Veronica Wambui Ndungu.
When the appellant was arraigned before Hon. Momanyi (SRM) on 5/2/2018, he pleaded guilty, facts were read to him to which he admitted. He was convicted and sentenced to serve 5 years imprisonment.
He filed an appeal challenging both conviction and sentence. However, at the hearing of the appeal, he abandoned the appeal on conviction. He therefore proceeded with the appeal on sentence alone.
The grounds of appeal are that the appellant is a young man aged 20 years; that he did not waste the court’s time when he came to court; that he was a first offender; that the court did not call for a pre-sentence report to help guide it in sentencing; that the sentence is too harsh.
He filed supplementary grounds of appeal which are that he has gone through rehabilitation programs at the prison, has been counseled, is remorseful and has acquired Grade III in carpentry and joinery, Grade III in masonry and can rely on the said skills to earn a decent living; that he was influenced by bad company but has now learnt. He prays that the court release him.
Ms. Rugut, learned counsel for the State opposed the appeal, counsel argued that having been convicted for the offence of stock theft, the maximum sentence provided in law is 14 years; that the trial court exercised its discretion and sentenced him to only 5 years and that he should be left in prison to learn all the other trades in order to be an asset to himself and others.
I have given due consideration to the grounds of appeal. Indeed the appellant pleaded guilty to the charge and did not waste the court’s time. The court noted that the appellant was not remorseful for the offence and decided to give him a deterrent sentence.
I have seen that the appellant is a young man. He claims to have learnt several kinds of trades that will enable him fend for himself and keep him out of mischief. I take into account the fact that the complainant recovered most of his lost property.
Having considered all the above, I am inclined to find that 5 years imprisonment was on the higher side and hereby set aside the said sentence. So far, the appellant has served one year and 8 months. I hereby sentence him to the period already served and he is hereby set at liberty unless otherwise lawfully held.
The appeal succeeds to that extent.
Dated, Signed and Delivered at NYAHURURU this 18thday ofOctober,2019.
...........................
R.P.V. Wendoh
JUDGE
PRESENT:
Ms. Rugut – State Counsel
Nyagah – Court assistant
Appellant - present