[1985] KEHC 68 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal found that the evidence of recent possession of the stolen cattle by the appellants was clear and uncontroverted. Both the trial court and the first appellate court made concurrent findings of fact that the appellants were found with two of the stolen cattle within hours of the theft. The learned...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1985] KEHC 68 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Uhuru Nyakundi; Appellant: Thomas Gweru; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 3 of 1985
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal (court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences upheld
- Legal Topics
- Stock Theft, Recent Possession, Criminal Sentencing, Appeals Process
- 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
Uhuru Nyakundi
Appellant
Thomas Gweru
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal (court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellants were properly convicted of stealing stock contrary to section 287 of the Penal Code.
- 2 Whether the doctrine of recent possession was correctly applied to the appellants.
- 3 Whether the sentence imposed was lawful and appropriate.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal found that the evidence of recent possession of the stolen cattle by the appellants was clear and uncontroverted. Both the trial court and the first appellate court made concurrent findings of fact that the appellants were found with two of the stolen cattle within hours of the theft. The learned judge on the first appeal correctly disregarded the admission of the second appellant on arrest, focusing instead on the objective evidence of possession. The court held that the doctrine of recent possession was properly applied and that the convictions were safe. There was no basis to interfere with the findings or the sentences imposed. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences upheld
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The convictions and sentences of the appellants are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
7 paragraphs
Nyakundi v Republic
High Court, at Kisumu June 19, 1985 Hancox JA, Platt & Gachuhi JJA
Criminal Appeal No 3 of 1985 (Appeal from the High Court at Kisumu, Schofield J
June 19, 1985, Hancox JA, Platt & Gachuhi JJA delivered the following Judgment.
The appellants Uhuru Nyakundi and Thomas Gweru were convicted on a charge of stealing stock contrary to section 287 of the Penal Code by the acting resident magistrate Kisii and sentenced to the statutory term of seven years imprisonment with hard labour and to receive 3 and 10 strokes of the cane respectively. They were to be placed under police supervision for five years after release. Their appeal to the High Court (Schofield J) was found that there was evidence that the appellants were found with two of the stolen cattle within hours of theft and dismissed their appeal.
The appellants have appealed to this court on a number of identical grounds. We have considered their grounds of appeal together with the senior state counsel submissions and have come to the conclusion that the appellants were correctly convicted as charged.
The evidence of their recent possession was very clear and there were concurrent findings of facts by both the lower courts. The learned judge on the first appeal correctly disregarded the admission of the second appellant on arrest. We therefore dismiss their appeal.