[2024] KEHC 4239 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant, though serving a sentence of less than three years and having pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement, was not suitable for a non-custodial sentence. This determination was based on the pre-sentence report, which found the applicant unsuitable, and the trial magistrate's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 4239 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Alabi Tunde Lateef; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kibera
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 118 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Eligibility for Non Custodial Sentence Following Conviction and Sentencing
- Outcome
- Application for non-custodial sentence declined; sentence of the trial court upheld.
- Judges
- DR Kavedza
- Legal Topics
- Narcotic Drugs Offences, Plea Bargaining, Sentencing Principles, Non Custodial Sentences
- 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
Alabi Tunde Lateef
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Eligibility for Non Custodial Sentence Following Conviction and Sentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is eligible for a non-custodial sentence under the Chief Justice's decongestion memo.
- 2 Whether the trial court properly exercised its discretion in declining a non-custodial sentence after considering the pre-sentence report and plea agreement.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant, though serving a sentence of less than three years and having pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement, was not suitable for a non-custodial sentence. This determination was based on the pre-sentence report, which found the applicant unsuitable, and the trial magistrate's proper exercise of discretion in sentencing. The court held that the sentence imposed was lawful and appropriate, and there was no basis to interfere with the trial court's decision. The applicant's benefit from a plea agreement was acknowledged, but it did not override the unsuitability for a non-custodial sentence as established by the pre-sentence report and the trial court's...
Court Disposition
Application for non-custodial sentence declined; sentence of the trial court upheld.
Orders
- The applicant is not eligible for a non-custodial sentence.
- File closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Lateef v Republic (Criminal Revision 118 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 4239 (KLR) (30 April 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 4239 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kibera
Criminal Revision 118 of 2024
DR Kavedza, J
April 30, 2024
Between
Alabi Tunde Lateef
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. This file was brought before me for the decongestion exercise pursuant to the Chief Justice’s memo dated 7/12/2022, which provides that inmates who are serving three years imprisonment or less may be considered for non-custodial sentences.
2. I have gone through the file and noted that the applicant herein was convicted on his own plea of guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement with the prosecution, for the offence of trafficking in narcotic drugs contrary to section 4 (a) (i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act No. 4 of 1994. He was sentenced on 05. 03. 2024 to serve eight (8) months imprisonment. He was also sentenced to pay a fine of Kshs. 200,000/=, in default to serve 1 year imprisonment. The sentences were to run concurrently.
3. Prior to sentencing, the trial magistrate considered that the applicant pleaded guilty and saved the court’s time. She also considered the pre-sentence report dated 26. 02. 2024, which found the applicant to be unsuitable for a non-custodial sentence.
4. I have thoroughly gone through the sentencing remarks by the trial court and found that the trial magistrate correctly arrived at the conclusion that the applicant is not suitable for a non-custodial sentence. I shall therefore not interfere with the sentence of the trial court.
5. Finally, the applicant pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea bargaining agreement with the prosecution dated 5th February 2024. I have also noted from the record that prior to adopting the said plea agreement, the trial magistrate extensively informed the applicant of his rights, which the applicant confirmed to have understood.
6. As such, following the plea bargaining agreement, the applicant benefitted from a lesser sentence, which he is bound to serve.
7. The upshot is that the applicant is not eligible for a non-custodial sentence.
8. File closed.
Orders accordingly.
RULING DELIVERED THIS DAY 30TH DAY OF APRIL 2024. ________________D. KAVEDZAJUDGE