[2022] KEHC 14544 (KLR)
The High Court found that the trial court had considered all relevant factors in sentencing and exercised its discretion properly. There was no basis for interfering with the sentence as no error of principle or misdirection was demonstrated. The appeal against sentence was therefore dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 14544 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Evans Lokou; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kapenguria
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal E016 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- AC Mrima
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Appeal Against Sentence
- 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
Evans Lokou
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was proper and justified.
- 2 Whether the appellate court should interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial court.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the trial court had considered all relevant factors in sentencing and exercised its discretion properly. There was no basis for interfering with the sentence as no error of principle or misdirection was demonstrated. The appeal against sentence was therefore dismissed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The file is closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
Lokou v Republic (Criminal Appeal E016 of 2022) [2022] KEHC 14544 (KLR) (14 October 2022) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 14544 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kapenguria
Criminal Appeal E016 of 2022
AC Mrima, J
October 14, 2022
Between
Evans Lokou
Appellant
and
Republic
State
Judgment
1I have considered the appeal against sentence.
2. The Principles upon which this court can interfere with the sentence in an appeal are settled inWanjema v Republic
3. Having perused the sentencing proceedings, the court is not able to fault the trial court. The court took into account all relevant factors and the sentence, being an exercise of discretion, cannot be familiarized to the circumstances the case. The appeal is not merited and the appellant may pursue other avenues of seeking what he wishes in this appeal.
4. The Upshot is that;-a.Appeal is dismissedb.File closed.
Dated at KAPENGURIA this 14th day of October, 2022. A.C. MRIMAJUDGE