[2015] KEHC 4758 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant's plea of guilty was unequivocal and made in a language she understood. There was no evidence of misunderstanding or coercion. The court also held that the period the appellant spent in police custody before being brought to court was not unreasonable, given that she was arrested...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 4758 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Judith Akoth Otieno; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 94 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- HK Chemitei
- Legal Topics
- Child Stealing, Plea of Guilty, Sentencing, Children's Rights
- 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
Judith Akoth Otieno
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant's plea of guilty was clear and unambiguous.
- 2 Whether the appellant's rights were violated by being held in police custody for more than 24 hours.
- 3 Whether the sentence imposed was lawful and justified.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant's plea of guilty was unequivocal and made in a language she understood. There was no evidence of misunderstanding or coercion. The court also held that the period the appellant spent in police custody before being brought to court was not unreasonable, given that she was arrested in Kakamega and brought to court in Kisumu. The appellant did not provide any satisfactory explanation for her actions or for failing to return the child to the mother. The appeal, which was based mainly on mitigation and procedural complaints, lacked merit and was dismissed. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court were upheld.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The conviction and sentence of seven years imprisonment are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 94 OF 2014
JUDITH AKOTH OTIENO....................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC..............................................RESPONDENT
From original conviction and sentence in the Principal Magistrate’s Court at Winam Criminal Case No. 201 of 2014]
J U D G M E N T
1). The appellant was charged with the offence of child stealing contrary to section 174 (1) (b) of the Penal Code.
The particulars were that on the 2nd day of February 2014 at Kibos area in Kisumu East District within Kisumu County stole J A O a child aged 2 weeks knowing it to have been detained away with intent to deprive J A O the parent (mother) who had lawful charge of the possession of the said J A O.
2). The alternative charge was infringing a child's right to parental care contrary to section 6 (1) as read with section 20 of the Children's Act No. 8 of 2001.
The particulars were that on the 2nd day of February 2014 at Kibos area in Kisumu East District within Kisumu County willfully denied JA O child aged two weeks the right to live with and be cared for by the mother (parent) by taking away the said J A O.
3). The appellant on her own plea of guilty was sentenced to seven years imprisonment hence this appeal. The substance of the appeal are basically mitigations.
4). The facts as can be gleaned from the proceedings are that on 2-2-2014 at around 8 am the appellant went to the home of the complainant who was with the new born child. She then requested to change the clothes of the baby as she was already wet. Later she requested the complainant to visit the home of one Michael who was living in the neighbourhood accompanied by the baby. The mother acceded but unfortunately she did not come back with the child.
5). The mother reported the incident at Kondele police station at who traced the appellant through her mobile phone. She was found at Kakamega Shikoli area and arrested. The appellant pleaded to facts after being read to her.
6). It is a trite law that when the plea is clear and unambiguous one cannot be heard to complain later. The language used by the court was kiswahili which she clearly understood.
Further in her mitigation before the trial court and before this court, the appellant did not explain why she disappeared with the child between 2nd February 2014 to 11-2-2014. If she meant well or was acting in good faith what was difficult in bringing back the child to her mother?
7). I do not think the argument raised in the petition regarding thefact that she was held for more than 24 hours at police custody holds water. It is clearly demonstrated that she was arrested at Kakamega on 11-2-2014 and brought to court on 13-2-2014 at Winam in Kisumu. I do not find this period inordinate at all.
The appeal is hereby dismissed.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kisumu this 30 day of March, 2015.
H.K. CHEMITEI
JUDGE