[1995] KEHC 117 (KLR)
The court found that the identification of the appellant by the police officers was reliable, as they had ample opportunity to observe him during the encounter and subsequent escape. The alibi defence was rejected as unconvincing. The conviction was therefore upheld as safe. However, the court considered the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1995] KEHC 117 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: John Kash Marongo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 937 of 1994
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.
- Legal Topics
- Burglary, Stealing, Identification Evidence, Sentencing, Appeals Against Conviction, Appeals Against 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
John Kash Marongo
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the identification of the appellant by the police officers was reliable and free from error.
- 2 Whether the conviction of the appellant was safe based on the evidence presented.
- 3 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly harsh and excessive in the circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the identification of the appellant by the police officers was reliable, as they had ample opportunity to observe him during the encounter and subsequent escape. The alibi defence was rejected as unconvincing. The conviction was therefore upheld as safe. However, the court considered the sentence imposed by the trial court to be manifestly harsh and excessive, particularly as the appellant had not benefited from the theft in this case, despite his previous convictions. The sentence was accordingly reduced to 2 ½ years imprisonment with 1 stroke for each limb of the offence, to run concurrently.
Court Disposition
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.
Orders
- Conviction upheld.
- Original sentence set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 937 OF 1994
JOHN KASH MAROGNO ……...……..APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC………....……..…………RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
The Appellant John Kash Marongo, was convicted after trial by the learned senior resident magistrate, Kiambu of the offence of Burglary and Stealing contrary to section 304 (2) and 279 (b) of the Penal Code. Upon his conviction, he was sentenced to serve 3 ½ years imprisonment with 4 strokes of the cane in respect of each limb. The sentence was to run concurrently. His appeal to this court is against both conviction and sentence.
There was no dispute that on the material night, 7th of June 1993, the house of the complainant which he had securely locked and left unguarded, was broken into and his bicycle and some clothing were stolen from therein. During the same night at about 4 a.m P.C. Joseph Munyao (PW2) and CPL Stephen Njuguna (PW3) who were on patrol duties met with the Appellant and another (who was separately convicted) while pushing a bicycle on which there was a bag containing several items. The police officers stopped them for interrogation but as they were not satisfied with the explanation given by the appellant and his co-accused, they decided to take them to the police station for further enquiries. It was then that the Appellant decided to run away and managed to escape despite the fact that the police officers had threatened to shoot him. They proceeded to the police station with the Appellant’s co-accused and soon thereafter the complainant came to the station to report the burglary at his house. When shown the bicycle which the police had recovered he identified the same as belonging to him. Later the appellant was arrested by the police for another offence and when brought to the police station, PW 2 &PW 3 recognised him as the man who had escaped from them the other day when found with a stolen bicycle. He was charged.
The defence of the Appellant was that he had been innocently arrested and charged in connection with this case and that he knew nothing about the alleged offence.
It is clear from the testimony of both PW2 and PW 3 that after they had stopped the Appellant and his co-accused, they questioned them for about 15 minutes before he decided to escape and run away. They had plenty of time with him in which to see him and mark his appearance and features. The alibi defence raised by the Appellant does not convince me to be true. I find that the identification of the Appellant by these police officers was free from any possibility of mistake or error. His conviction was safe.
I dismiss the appeal against conviction.
As regards the sentence that was imposed, even though the Appellant had four previous convictions, he had not benefited from the theft in this particular case. The sentence imposed, in my view was in the circumstances, manifestly harsh and excessive. I allow the appeal against sentence, which I hereby set aside and substitute, with a sentence for 2 ½ years imprisonment with 1 stroke in respect of each limb of the offence to run concurrently. It is so ordered.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 15th day of February, 1995
S.O. OGUK
JUDGE