[2019] KEHC 11534 (KLR)
The High Court found that the trial court exercised its discretion properly in sentencing the applicant to five years imprisonment for attempted rape. The court held that the sentence was extremely lenient considering the seriousness of the offence and that there was no evidence the trial court applied the wrong...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 11534 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Morgan Rumenda Mason; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 1132 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Revision
- Outcome
- application dismissed; sentence of trial court confirmed
- Judges
- LK Kimaru
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Sexual Offences, Revision Jurisdiction
- 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
Morgan Rumenda Mason
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Revision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court erred in sentencing the applicant to a custodial sentence instead of a non-custodial sentence.
- 2 Whether the trial court failed to consider relevant factors or applied the wrong legal principles in sentencing.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the trial court exercised its discretion properly in sentencing the applicant to five years imprisonment for attempted rape. The court held that the sentence was extremely lenient considering the seriousness of the offence and that there was no evidence the trial court applied the wrong legal principles or failed to consider relevant factors. As such, there was no basis for the High Court to interfere with the sentence imposed. The application for revision was therefore dismissed and the original sentence confirmed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed; sentence of trial court confirmed
Orders
- The applicant's application for sentence revision is dismissed.
- The sentence of the trial court is confirmed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL REVISION NO.1132 OF 2018
MORGAN RUMENDA MASON................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
The Applicant, Morgan Rumenda Mason was convicted of the offence of attempted rape contrary to Section 4 of the Sexual Offences Act. The particulars of the offence which were established by the prosecution were that on 28th February 2017 at Bomas Forest Langata in Nairobi County, the Appellant intentionally and unlawfully attempted to cause his penis to penetrate the vagina of VW without her consent. Whereas the Appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge, after full trial, he was found guilty and accordingly convicted. He was sentenced to serve five (5) years imprisonment. The sentence was imposed on 10th November 2017.
The Applicant has moved this court by a notice of motion to have the sentence revised on the grounds that he ought to have been sentenced to serve a non-custodial sentence. He urged the court to take into consideration that he had been in prison since 28th February 2017 when he was arrested. He stated that he is a first offender and was the sole breadwinner for his wife and four children. He pleaded for leniency from the court. Ms. Kimaru for the State opposed the application. She submitted that the sentence of five years imprisonment that was imposed on the Applicant was extremely lenient taking into consideration the circumstances in which the offence was committed. She was of the view that the Applicant was not remorseful and should therefore fully serve the custodial sentence that was imposed on him.
This court has carefully re-evaluated the rival submission made by the parties to this application. This court can only interfere with the exercise of discretion by the trial court when it sentenced the Applicant if it is established that the trial court either applied the wrong principle of law or failed to take into consideration a relevant factor when it sentenced the Applicant. In the present application, it was clear to this court that the sentence that was imposed by the trial court was extremely lenient taking into consideration the offence that the Applicant committed. The trial court did not make any error of principle or failed to take into consideration any relevant factor recognized by the law when it sentenced the Applicant to serve the said term in prison.
In the premises therefore, this court finds no merit with the Applicant’s application as a result of which the Applicant’s application is hereby dismissed. The sentence of the trial court is confirmed. It is so ordered.
DATED AT NAIROBI THIS 4TH DAY OF JULY 2019
L. KIMARU
JUDGE