[2012] KEHC 3259 (KLR)
The court found that the appellants were first offenders, had shown genuine remorse, and all stolen items had been recovered. The court considered their personal circumstances, including efforts at rehabilitation while in prison, and concluded that the period already served was sufficient punishment. The original...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 3259 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: John Ijaan Ekapten; Appellant: Denis Onyango Ekosowan; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Busia
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 101 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Sentencing
- Outcome
- sentence set aside and substituted with period already served; appellants released
- Judges
- LK Kimaru
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Appeals, First Offender Principle, Remorse and Rehabilitation
- 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
John Ijaan Ekapten
Appellant
Denis Onyango Ekosowan
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed by the subordinate court was excessive in light of the appellants being first offenders and the recovery of stolen items.
- 2 Whether the period already served by the appellants constituted sufficient punishment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellants were first offenders, had shown genuine remorse, and all stolen items had been recovered. The court considered their personal circumstances, including efforts at rehabilitation while in prison, and concluded that the period already served was sufficient punishment. The original sentence was set aside and substituted with a sentence commuted to time served, resulting in the appellants' immediate release.
Court Disposition
sentence set aside and substituted with period already served; appellants released
Orders
- The sentence of the subordinate court is set aside and substituted with a sentence commuted to the period already served.
- The appellants are ordered set at liberty and released from prison unless otherwise lawfully held.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
34 paragraphs
c
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT BUSIA
Criminal Appeal 101 of 2011
1. .JOHN IJAAN EKAPTEN ………………………………………………………APPELLANTS
2. DENIS ONYANGO EKOSOWAN………………………………………………APPELLANTS
VERSUS
REPUBLIC …………………………………………………………………….…RESPONDENT
SENTENCING
7/5/12
Before: Kimaru J.
Mutai – court clerk
Mr. Okeyo for State
John IjaanIkapel 1st Appellant present
Dennis OnyangoOkosowan – 1st appellant
OKEYO
I pray that the appeals No.101 and 73e of 2011 be consolidated heard together as one. The appeal arose from the same proceedings in the lower court.
1st Appellant – no objection
2nd Appellant – no objection
ORDER
Criminal Appeal No.101 of 2011 and no.73 of 2011 are hereby consolidated and shall be heard together as one. Proceedings shall be taken in file No.73 of 2011.
L. KIMARU
JUDGE
1ST APPELLANT.
I am appealing against sentence. I am a first offender. I was jailed for 3 years. I am remorseful for the offence that I committed. I was jailed on 30/9/2010. I have no other case pending. I plead for the leniency of the court. I am 28 years. I am single. I make bricks for sale. I also worked part time as untrained teacher. I attained C+ in 2003 at Weaverbird Academy. My mother is alive. My dad died in 2005. I have 3 brothers and 3 girls. I am the 2nd born. I committed the offence due to idleness and involvement with bad company. I am now born-again. I have been in jail for 21 months. I have trained to be builder(mason) in prison. I will use this skill to earn a living.
2ND APPELLANT
I am pleading for leniency. I am only appealing against sentence. I am the sole breadwinner of my family. I have a sister. I was cheated to commit the offence. I was involved in bad company that is why I committed the offence. I ask the court to exercise leniency. I committed the offence because I was lazy. I am 27 years old.
OKEYO
Appeal is on sentence only. The maximum sentence is seven (7) years imprisonment. I am aware of the circumstances that led to their involvement in the theft access to the house where the items were stolen was given by the maid. Before she testified she had pleaded guilty and sentenced to serve three (3) years probation.
COURT
I have considered the appeal of the appellants on sentence. I have also considered the entire circumstances of this case. The appellants were first offenders. All the stolen items were recovered. The appellants appear to the court to be remorseful. They have learnt their lesson in prison. This court is of the opinion that the period that the appellants have been in prison is sufficient punishment for them. This court therefore sets aside the sentence of the subordinate court and substitutes it with a sentence of this court commuting the sentence of the appellants to the period already served.The appellants are ordered set at liberty and released from prison unless otherwise lawfully held.
L. KIMARU
J U D G E