[2013] KEHC 899 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's case contained too many loose ends and inconsistencies, making it unsafe to uphold the conviction for robbery with violence. The court relied on its earlier reasoning in the consolidated appeal of Maiywa Ratanyang v Republic, where it held that the evidence was insufficient to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 899 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Kasokes Longoleting; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 93 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed; conviction and sentence quashed and set aside
- Legal Topics
- Robbery With Violence, Conviction Quashing, Sentencing Principles, Appeal Procedure
- 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
Kasokes Longoleting
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for robbery with violence was safe based on the evidence presented.
- 2 Whether the sentence of death was lawfully imposed and appropriate in the circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's case contained too many loose ends and inconsistencies, making it unsafe to uphold the conviction for robbery with violence. The court relied on its earlier reasoning in the consolidated appeal of Maiywa Ratanyang v Republic, where it held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction. Consequently, the conviction and sentence were quashed and set aside, and the appellant was ordered to be released unless otherwise lawfully held.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed; conviction and sentence quashed and set aside
Orders
- The conviction and sentence against the appellant are quashed and set aside.
- The appellant shall be set free forthwith unless held for some other lawful cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 93 OF 2009
KASOKES LONGOLETING …….…….……….APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC………….……………………………RESPONDENT
(Being anappeal from the original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No. 472 of 2008 Republic vs Kasokes Longoletiang & Maiwa Ratinyang in the Principal Magistrates’ Court at Kabarnet by Hon. H.M. Nyaga Senior Resident Magistrate dated 8th June,2009)
JUDGMENT
The appellant, Kasokes Longoleting, was convicted on two counts for the offence of robbery with violence contrary to section 296(2) of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to death.
The sentence was handed down in respect of count 1 only. As regards count 3, the learned trial Magistrate ordered that the sentence be held in abeyance.
This appeal was consolidated with Eldoret High Court Criminal Appeal 92 of 2009 Maiywa Ratanyang v Republic. The appellant here and his co-accused in that other appeal were charged jointly and on similar counts. On 28th November 2013, and after re-evaluating the evidence in the lower court, we delivered judgment in Maiywa Ratanyang v Republic (supra) in the following terms-
“There are too many loose ends in the case put forward by the prosecution. It would thus be unsafe to uphold the conviction.
However, if we had upheld the conviction, we would have upheld the sentences. We say so because each human being has one life. Therefore, if there be more than one death sentence in respect to one person, the trial court would be expected to hand down one sentence, and to hold the other in abeyance.
In the final analysis, the convictions are quashed on both counts, and the sentences set aside”.
For the same reasons, this appeal is also allowed. The conviction and sentence against the appellant is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellant shall be set free forthwith unless held for some other lawful cause.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at ELDORET this 2nd day of December 2013
FRED A. OCHIENG G.K. KIMONDO
JUDGE JUDGE
Judgment read in open court in the presence of
Mr…………………………………………………for the appellant.
Mr……………………………….………………..….…for the State.
Mr……………………………………………………….. Court Clerk.