[1982] KECA 19 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal held that the concurrent findings of fact by the trial and first appellate courts, which found that the appellant was properly identified by two witnesses, were based on evidence and thus binding on the appellate court. The court distinguished this case from authorities warning against reliance...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1982] KECA 19 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Njoroge; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 28 of 1979
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- EJE Law, CHE Miller, KD Potter
- Legal Topics
- Robbery With Violence, Identification Evidence, Appellate Review, Burden of Proof
- 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
Njoroge
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant was properly identified as one of the robbers involved in the bank robbery.
- 2 Whether the evidence of identification by the eyewitnesses was reliable and sufficient to sustain a conviction.
- 3 Whether the concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts were based on evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal held that the concurrent findings of fact by the trial and first appellate courts, which found that the appellant was properly identified by two witnesses, were based on evidence and thus binding on the appellate court. The court distinguished this case from authorities warning against reliance on single-witness identification under difficult conditions, noting that here there were two identifying witnesses and no evidence that the findings were unsupported. The appellant's challenge to the reliability of the identification was rejected, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
(Coram: Law, Miller & Potter JJA)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 28 OF 1979
NJOROGE .....................................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC....................................................RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
The appellant was convicted by the Resident Magistrate at Thika of robbery with violence contrary to Section 296(2) of the Penal Code and was sentenced to the mandatory death sentence. His appeal to the High Court was dismissed.
On this second appeal, we are only concerned with points of law and consider ourselves bound by the concurrent findings of fact arrived at in the courts below, unless shown to be based on no evidence.
The robbery out of which this appeal arises was a bank robbery carried out in broad daylight in the course of which some Kshs 350,000 was stolen from the Standard Bank at Thika by a gang of robbers one of whom at least was armed with a gun. On the concurrent findings of both courts below, the appellant was identified as the armed robber by two eyewitnesses, a cashier Mr Kariuki (PW 8) and a policeman who happened to be in the bank at the time, PC Sironga (PW 13). Both these witnesses subsequently picked out the appellant at properly conducted identification parades. Mr Kariuki at a subsequent parade also picked out a person who was not a suspect.
Mr Gathenji for the appellant submitted that by picking out an innocent man, Mr Kariuki had shown himself to be an unreliable witness whose evidence should have been rejected, especially as he had only seen the person whom he identified as the appellant for a very short time which he put at three seconds. The first appellate court had this aspect of the case very much in mind and gave it careful consideration. They held that Mr Kariuki’s evidence was reliable because he picked out the appellant at the identification parade and because his evidence of identification was supported by that of PC Sironga, who saw the appellant both inside and outside the bank and had picked him out of a parade. We are thus faced with concurrent findings of fact, based on evidence, that the appellant was correctly identified by two witnesses.
Although the robbery was of necessity attended by some degree of confusion, these concurrent findings of fact remove this case from the scope of such authorities as Wendo v R[1953] 20 EACA 166 and Roria v R[1967] EA 583 which were concerned with the dangers attendant upon identification by a single witness under conditions rendering identification difficult. In this case, on the concurrent findings of both courts below, the appellant was identified by two witnesses and there was evidence to support those findings, which are accordingly binding on this Court.
It follows that in our view, this appeal fails and must be dismissed, and we so order.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 15th day of March, 1982.
E.J.E LAW
.........................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
C.H.E MILLER
.........................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
K.D POTTER
.........................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR