[2021] KEHC 5130 (KLR)
The court found that the sentences imposed on the appellants were lawful and in strict compliance with the mandatory minimums set by Section 95 of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act 2013. Since the appellants pleaded guilty and the law prescribes a minimum fine of one million shillings or five years'...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 5130 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Joseph Kimanzi Musyoka; Appellant: Samuel Gitonga; Appellant: Peter Kimathi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 174,175 & 176 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- TW Cherere
- Legal Topics
- Wildlife Offences, Sentencing, Plea of Guilty, Possession of Wildlife Trophy
- 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
Joseph Kimanzi Musyoka
Appellant
Samuel Gitonga
Appellant
Peter Kimathi
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed for possession of wildlife trophy was legal and warranted interference by the appellate court.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the sentences imposed on the appellants were lawful and in strict compliance with the mandatory minimums set by Section 95 of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act 2013. Since the appellants pleaded guilty and the law prescribes a minimum fine of one million shillings or five years' imprisonment or both, the trial court had no discretion to impose a lesser sentence. There was no illegality or impropriety in the sentences to warrant interference by the appellate court. The appeals were therefore dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeals are dismissed.
- The sentences imposed by the trial court are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
34 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MERU
(CORAM: CHERERE -J)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.NO.174OF 2019
CONSOLIDATED WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.NO.175 AND 176OF 2019
BETWEEN
JOSEPH KIMANZI MUSYOKA..................................................................1ST APPELLANT
SAMUEL GITONGA.....................................................................................2ND APPELLANT
PETER KIMATHI..........................................................................................3RD APPELLANT
AND
REPUBLIC...........................................................................................................RESPONDENT
(Appeal against sentence in Maua Chief Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No. 837 of 2018
by Hon. A.G.Munene (SRM) on 23rd April, 2018)
JUDGMENT
The Trial
1. Accused were convicted on their own plea for the offence of being in possession of wildlife trophy (3 Pieces of elephant tusks) contrary to section 95 of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act 2013 (the Act).
2. Each Appellants was fined Kshs. 1,000,000/- in default 5 years’ imprisonment.
3. Appellants appeal on sentence is opposed by the state on the ground that it is legal.
Analysis and Determination
4. Section 348 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides that
No appeal shall be allowed in the case of an accused person who has pleaded guilty and has been convicted on that plea by a subordinate court, except as to the extent or legality of the sentence.
5. Section 95 of the Act under which Appellants were charged provides that:
Any person who keeps or is found in Possession of a wildlife trophy or deals in a wildlife trophy, or manufactures any item from a trophy without a permit issued under this Act or exempted in accordance with any other provision of this Act, commits an offence and shall be liable upon conviction to a fine of not less than one million shillings or imprisonment for a term of not less than five years or to both such imprisonment and fine.
6. There is no illegality in the sentences imposed on the Appellants to warrant any interference by this court.
7. The appeals are considered and found to have no merit and they are dismissed.
DATED AT MERU THIS 15TH DAY JULY , 2021
T. W. CHERERE
JUDGE
Court Assistant - Mr. Kinoti
1st Appellant - Present
2nd Appellant - Present
3rd Appellant - Present
For the State - Ms. Mwaniki