[2024] KEHC 15011 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant, a first offender who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanour and demonstrated remorse, was a suitable candidate for a non-custodial sentence. The judge determined that the period already served in custody was sufficient to meet the objectives of sentencing, including punishment and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 15011 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Hillary Kiptoo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E261 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
- Outcome
- sentence reviewed; applicant released unless otherwise lawfully held
- Judges
- RN Nyakundi
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Review, Non Custodial Sentence, Plea of Guilty, Mitigation, First Offender, Victim Offender Mediation
- 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
Hillary Kiptoo
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the custodial sentence imposed on the applicant, a first offender who pleaded guilty to stealing, should be reviewed in favour of a non-custodial sentence.
- 2 Whether the period already served in custody is sufficient to meet the objectives of sentencing in this case.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant, a first offender who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanour and demonstrated remorse, was a suitable candidate for a non-custodial sentence. The judge determined that the period already served in custody was sufficient to meet the objectives of sentencing, including punishment and rehabilitation. The court emphasized that custodial sentences should be avoided for misdemeanours, especially for first offenders, unless there are aggravating factors. The judge also noted that the circumstances of the case would have been appropriate for victim-offender mediation, further supporting the appropriateness of a non-custodial approach. Consequently, the custodial...
Court Disposition
sentence reviewed; applicant released unless otherwise lawfully held
Orders
- The custodial sentence imposed by the trial court is reviewed to the period already served.
- The applicant is at liberty unless otherwise lawfully held.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Kiptoo v Republic (Criminal Revision E261 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 15011 (KLR) (29 November 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 15011 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Eldoret
Criminal Revision E261 of 2024
RN Nyakundi, J
November 29, 2024
Between
Hillary Kiptoo
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant was charged with the offence of stealing contrary to section 268 as read with section 275 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence are that on 30th January, 2024 at Saroyot village in Kesses sub-county within Uasin Gishu County, one gear lever box and five arrow disc plates all valued at Kshs. 45,000/=, the property of Christopher Kipkering.
2. The applicant pleaded guilty to the offence and as a consequence, he was convicted on his own plea of guilty and sentenced to serve 12 months’ imprisonment.
3. The applicant has approached this court pursuant to sections 357,362,364& 382 of the Criminal Procedure Code as construed with Article 50(2) (p) & (q) as conjunctively read with Article 50(6)(a) & (b) of the Constitution.
4. The applicant seeks review of the sentence imposed by the trial court. The applicant wishes to be considered for a non-custodial sentence. I have reviewed the record and the mitigating factors advanced by the applicant at the trial court.
5. In determining whether to impose a custodial or non-custodial sentence, the court is required to take into account the following factors: -a)Gravity of the offence: - sentence of imprisonment should be avoided for misdemeanour.b)Criminal history of the offender. Taking into account the seriousness of the offences, first offenders should be considered for non-custodial sentence.c)Character of the offender: - non-custodial sentence are best suited for offenders who are already remorseful and receptive to rehabilitative measures.d)Protection of the community: - where the offender is likely to pose a threat to the community.e)Offender’s responsibility to third parties: - where there are people depending on the offender.f)Children in conflict with the law: - non- custodial orders should be imposed as a matter of course in cases of children in conflict with law, except in circumstances where, in light of the seriousness of the offence coupled with other factors, the court is satisfied that a custodial order is the most appropriate.
6. A review of the record shows circumstances that would have been a perfect fit for victim-offender mediation. I believe that for the time spent in custody, the applicant has appreciated the seriousness of the offence. From the above analysis, I am of the considered opinion that the period served in custody by the applicant is sufficient when considering the objectives of sentencing in totality. The sentence is hereby reviewed to the period already served. The applicant is therefore at liberty unless and otherwise lawfully held.
SIGNED, DATE AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 29THDAY OF NOVEMBER 2024. …………………………………….R. NYAKUNDIJUDGE