[2013] KEHC 1542 (KLR)
The court found that although the sentence of twelve years was within the statutory maximum for handling stolen goods, the appellant was a first offender and had mitigating circumstances, including poor eyesight and demonstrated remorse. The court held that the sentence imposed was severe in the circumstances and,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 1542 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: John Opiyo Ogolla; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 19 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- sentence reduced
- Judges
- LN Mutende
- Legal Topics
- Handling Stolen Goods, Sentencing Principles, Mitigation, First Offender, Penal Code Section 322, Appeal 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 Opiyo Ogolla
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of twelve years imprisonment for handling stolen goods was harsh or excessive.
- 2 Whether the appellant's mitigation and status as a first offender warranted reduction of sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the sentence of twelve years was within the statutory maximum for handling stolen goods, the appellant was a first offender and had mitigating circumstances, including poor eyesight and demonstrated remorse. The court held that the sentence imposed was severe in the circumstances and, exercising its discretion, quashed the original sentence and substituted it with a term of five years imprisonment. The seriousness of the offence was acknowledged, but the mitigating factors justified a reduction in sentence.
Court Disposition
sentence reduced
Orders
- The sentence of twelve years imprisonment is quashed and set aside.
- The appellant is sentenced to five years imprisonment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 19 OF 2011
JOHN OPIYO OGOLLA........................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC………………………………………………..RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the original conviction and sentence in Machakos Chief Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No. 443/2010 by Hon. J. Omange on 5. 1.2011)
JUDGMENT
John Opiyo Ogolla, the Appellant was charged, tried and convicted on an alternative Count of handling stolen goods contrary to Section 322 (2) of the Penal Code. The particulars thereof being that on the 17th day of February 2010 at Senior Staff Quarters Athi – River in Machakos District within Eastern Province, otherwise that in the cause of stealing dishonestly received or retained one TV make JVC and one DVD machine make sony knowing or having reason to believe them to be stolen goods. He was tried, convicted and sentenced to twelve (12) years imprisonment with hard labour.
Being aggrieved by the sentence passed. In his mitigation the Appellant averred that he is remorseful having understood the virtues of a good and law abiding citizen, he has embraced Christianity and would like to go back to the society to be a role model of the youth who are leading an immoral life.
At the hearing he stated that he has a wife with children and he is ailing. He sought to be released or in the alternative reduction of the sentence imposed.
In a response thereto, the Learned State Counsel Mr. Mwangiasked the Court to confirm the sentence imposed.
It has been argued that the sentence imposed was harsh. The sentence provided for the offence of handling stolen goods is imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years. A sentence being lenient or harsh may not necessarily warrant intervention by an appellate court, especially if it is undeniably correct. Circumstances of the offence must be considered. In this case the sentence imposed by the trial court was within the law. The accused had been charged with two (2) Counts of robbery with violence, an offence that would have attracted death penalty. He was acquitted of the offence. However, he was found in possession of goods stolen in the course of the said robbery. This makes the offence serious.
The court established that the accused was a first offender. In his mitigation the appellant has demonstrated that he has poor eye sight. He was treated at Kenyatta National Hospital where the left eye was found to have cataract. This is not a life threatening ailment.
However, taking into consideration the fact that the appellant was a first offender, the sentence imposed being severe, I do quash and set it aside, and substitute it with imprisonment for a term of 5 years.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVEREDat MACHAKOS this 30THday of OCTOBER, 2013.
L.N. MUTENDE
JUDGE