[2022] KEHC 13602 (KLR)
The court held that the sentence of eighteen months imprisonment imposed on the applicant was lawful and lenient, considering the maximum sentence for the offence is five years under section 305(1) of the Penal Code. The applicant's status as a first offender and his plea of guilty were considered, but the court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 13602 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Paul Langat Malakwen; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Naivasha
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E149 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Revision
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- GL Nzioka
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Plea of Guilty, Revision of 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
Paul Langat Malakwen
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Revision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of eighteen months imprisonment imposed on the applicant was excessive or warranted revision.
- 2 Whether the applicant's status as a first offender and other mitigating factors justified a non-custodial sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the sentence of eighteen months imprisonment imposed on the applicant was lawful and lenient, considering the maximum sentence for the offence is five years under section 305(1) of the Penal Code. The applicant's status as a first offender and his plea of guilty were considered, but the court found no basis to interfere with the sentence, as it was neither illegal nor excessive. The application for revision was therefore dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revision of sentence is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
Malakwen v Republic (Criminal Revision E149 of 2022) [2022] KEHC 13602 (KLR) (4 October 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 13602 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Naivasha
Criminal Revision E149 of 2022
GL Nzioka, J
October 4, 2022
Between
Paul Langat Malakwen
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant was charged before the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Naivasha vide criminal case No E1177 of 2022, with the offence of being in a dwelling house with intent to commit a felony contrary to section 305(1) of the Penal Code. The particulars of the charge are as per the charge sheet.
2. The charges was read to the applicant and he pleaded guilty. He was then convicted on his own plea of guilty and sentenced to serve eighteen(18) months imprisonment
3. He now prays for revision of the sentence as stated in the notice of motion application filed in court on September 15, 2022. It is supported by an affidavit and a memorandum of sentence review in which he states as follows;-a.That, I am a first offenderb.That, I pray that this honourable court allow me to spend the remaining period of my sentence under community service order (C.S.O) or set me at liberty.c.That, I am remorseful of my offence and I have learnt to be a law -abiding citizend.That, I am from a poor family backgrounde.That, I did not give proper mitigation during my sentencing and hence would like to present during the hearing and determination of this applicationf.That, I humbly beg this honourable court for leniency and reduce my eighteen (18) months sentence.g.That, I am not appealing against sentence and conviction but applying for a review of sentence.I have considered the application in the light of the materials placed before the court and I note that, the offence with which the applicant was convicted of is provided for under section 305(1) of the Penal Code, which stipulates as follows;-“Any person who enters or is in any building, tent or vessel used as a human dwelling with intent to commit a felony therein is guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for five years”.
4. Pursuant to the aforesaid, a custodial sentence of 18 months is quite lenient-against a sentence of seven years provided for under the law. I therefore find no basis to interfere with the sentence in anyway and I dismiss the application accordingly.
GRACE L. NZIOKAJUDGE4/10/2022