[2020] KEHC 2410 (KLR)
The court found that the trial record clearly showed interpretation into the appellant's language (Pokot) and that the appellant admitted both the charge and the facts as narrated by the prosecution. The plea was therefore unequivocal and valid. The sentence of five years imprisonment was within the statutory...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 2410 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Ngolekou Nanduma; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nanyuki
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 121 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- DW Mbuteti
- Legal Topics
- Stock Theft, Plea of Guilty, Sentencing Principles, Language of Proceedings
- 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
Ngolekou Nanduma
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant's plea of guilty was unequivocal and valid.
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was harsh or excessive in the circumstances.
- 3 Whether the appellant understood the proceedings due to language barriers.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial record clearly showed interpretation into the appellant's language (Pokot) and that the appellant admitted both the charge and the facts as narrated by the prosecution. The plea was therefore unequivocal and valid. The sentence of five years imprisonment was within the statutory maximum of fourteen years for stock theft, and was justified given the lack of remorse and the fact that none of the stolen goats were recovered. There was no basis for appellate interference with either conviction or sentence. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appellant's entire appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NANYUKI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 121 OF 2017
NGOLEKOU NANDUMA............................APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC.................................................RESPONDENT
(Appeal from original Sentence dated 03/07/2017 in
Maralal PM Criminal Case No 490 of 2017 – A Gachie, SRM)
J U D G M E N T
1. The Appellant herein, NGOLEKOU NANDUMA, was convicted upon his own plea of stealing stock contrary to section 278 of the Penal Code. On 03/07/2017 he was sentenced to serve five (5) years imprisonment.
2. Although the main thrust of the Appellant’s appeal is with regard to the sentence, he has also complained that he did not know what happened during the proceedings before the trial court because, he alleges, he did not then understand Kiswahili, though at the hearing of this appeal he was fully fluent in Kiswahili, which he stated he has learnt while in prison. The Appellant denied that he admitted the charge.
3. Regarding the sentence, the Appellant argued that the same was unduly harsh and excessive in the circumstances of his case.
4. Learned public prosecutor supported the conviction and sentence. He pointed out that there was interpretation from Kiswahili to Pokot (the Appellant’s language), and that the Appellant freely admitted both the charge and the facts narrated by the prosecution. Regarding sentence, learned counsel pointed out that the Appellant got only 5 years out of a possible 14 years, that none of the 21 goats (valued at kshs.110,000/00) stolen were recovered, and that the Appellant was clearly not remorseful, having stated in mitigation only, “I stole because my goats were also stolen…”.
5. I have examined the record of the trial court. It shows clearly that there was interpretation into Pokot language by one JANE CHEMATUMO who was sworn before she undertook the interpretation.
6. The record also shows clearly that the Appellant admitted both the charge and the facts stated by the prosecution. Those facts disclosed the offence charged.
7. I am satisfied that the Appellant’s plea was free, clear and unequivocal. His conviction is safe.
8. Regarding the sentence, the Appellant was indeed not remorseful. He stole 21 goats which were never recovered. The sentence meted out was lawful and deserved. The trial court gave its reasons why it so sentenced the Appellant. There is no reason for this court to interfere.
9. I find no merit in the Appellant’s entire appeal. It is hereby dismissed. It is so ordered.
DATED AND SIGNED AT NANYUKI THIS 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020
H P G WAWERU
JUDGE
DELIVERED AT NANYUKI THIS 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020