[2021] KEHC 6350 (KLR)
The court found that the custodial sentence imposed by the trial magistrate was harsh and excessive given the value of the stolen items and the fact that some items were recovered and returned to the complainant. The court also considered the Applicant's demonstrated remorse, efforts at rehabilitation, and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 6350 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Leonard Wanjala Simiyu; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Revision Case 55 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- sentence revised; original sentences set aside; consolidated sentence imposed
- Judges
- LK Kimaru
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Revision of Sentence, Burglary, Stealing, Judicial Discretion
- 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
Leonard Wanjala Simiyu
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed on the Applicant was manifestly harsh or excessive in the circumstances.
- 2 Whether the trial court failed to consider relevant sentencing principles or took into account wrong principles.
- 3 Whether the Applicant's remorse and rehabilitation justify a revision of sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the custodial sentence imposed by the trial magistrate was harsh and excessive given the value of the stolen items and the fact that some items were recovered and returned to the complainant. The court also considered the Applicant's demonstrated remorse, efforts at rehabilitation, and acquisition of skills while in prison. These factors indicated that the Applicant was on the path to reform and justified a reduction of the sentence. Consequently, the court set aside the original sentences and imposed a consolidated custodial sentence of three years imprisonment, effective from the date of the original sentencing.
Court Disposition
sentence revised; original sentences set aside; consolidated sentence imposed
Orders
- The custodial sentence imposed on the Applicant by the trial court is set aside.
- The Applicant is sentenced to serve a consolidated custodial sentence of three years imprisonment with effect from 29th June 2020.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE
REVISION NO. 55 OF 2021 (E067 OF 2021)
LEONARD WANJALA SIMIYU........ APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC ......................................RESPONDENT
RULING
The Applicant, Leonard Wanjala Simiyu was convicted on his own plea of guilty of the charge of Burglary and Stealing contrarytoSection 304 (4) andSection 279 (6)of thePenal Code. From the facts narrated to the court by the Prosecution, the Applicant, with others not before court, on 11th June 2020 broke into the house of Nancy Cheruto Mkanda situate at Sitatunga location and stole therefrom various household and electronic goods valued at Kshs 100,000/=. The trial magistrate sentenced the Applicant to respectively serve three (3) and six (6) years imprisonment for the two ocharges. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
The Applicant has made an application before this court to have his sentence revised. He told the court that he was remorseful and regrets committing the offences that he was convicted of. He categorically stated that he had reformed in the period of one about year that he has been in Prison. He had become a better person and was ready to be reintegrated back to the society. He promised not to commit another if the court favourably considers his application for revision of sentence. While in Prison, he had learnt a trade that will enable him to be a better and useful person to the community. On the spiritual front, he had grown and had learnt that crime does not pay. Mr Omooria for the State was not opposed to the Court appropriately exercising its discretion.
When the trial magistrate sentenced the Applicant, he was exercising judicial discretion. This discretion can only be interfered with by an appellate court if it is established that, either the sentence was manifestly harsh or excessive or that it was so lenient as to cause affront to the precepts of justice. This court will interfere with the sentence if it is established that the trial court took into account wrong principles or failed to take into account the relevant sentencing principles.
In the present application, It was clear to this court that the custodial sentence meted out on the Applicant was harsh and excessive taking into consideration the value of the stolen items and the fact that some of the said stolen items were recovered and returned to the complainant. In revising the sentence this court has also taken into consideration the fact that in the period of nearly one (1) year that the Applicant has been in prison, he appears to have learnt the folly of his ways. He is on the path to reform. He is undertaking courses in prison that will make him acquire skills that will make him a useful member of the society upon his release.
In the premises therefore, this court holds that the custodial sentence imposed on the Applicant cannot stand and is hereby set aside. Instead, the Applicant is sentenced to serve a consolidated custodial sentence of three (3) years imprisonment with effect from 29th June 2020 when the Applicant was sentenced by the trial court. This court is of the view that the said sentence fits the crime committed. It is so ordered.
DATED AT KITALE THIS 9TH DAY OF JUNE 20921.
L. KIMARU
JUDGE