[2023] KEHC 26405 (KLR)
The court found that although the probation officer's report was unfavorable to a non-custodial sentence due to the appellant's negative portrayal and community hostility, the appellant's guilty plea, youth, remorse, and efforts at reform were significant mitigating factors. The original sentence of 15 years...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 26405 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Joseph Mwita Nyamohanga; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Migori
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal E015 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal partially allowed; sentence reduced
- Judges
- RPV Wendoh
- Legal Topics
- Manslaughter, Sentencing Principles, Guilty Plea, Mitigation, Probation Reports
- 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
Joseph Mwita Nyamohanga
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of 15 years imprisonment for manslaughter was manifestly excessive in the circumstances.
- 2 Whether the appellant's guilty plea, remorse, and personal circumstances warranted a reduction of sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the probation officer's report was unfavorable to a non-custodial sentence due to the appellant's negative portrayal and community hostility, the appellant's guilty plea, youth, remorse, and efforts at reform were significant mitigating factors. The original sentence of 15 years imprisonment was deemed manifestly excessive in the circumstances. The court exercised its discretion to reduce the sentence to 12 years imprisonment, effective from the date of plea, balancing the gravity of the offence with the appellant's mitigation and the interests of justice.
Court Disposition
appeal partially allowed; sentence reduced
Orders
- The sentence of 15 years imprisonment is set aside and substituted with a sentence of 12 years imprisonment.
- The sentence shall run from 5/7/2021, the date the appellant took plea.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Nyamohanga v Republic (Criminal Appeal E015 of 2022) [2023] KEHC 26405 (KLR) (14 December 2023) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 26405 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Migori
Criminal Appeal E015 of 2022
RPV Wendoh, J
December 14, 2023
Between
Joseph Mwita Nyamohanga
Appellant
and
Republic
Respondent
(From original conviction and sentence by Hon. L. N. Mesa – Principal Magistrate in Senior Principal Magistrate’s Court Kehancha Criminal Case NO. E 832 OF 2021 delivered on 14/7/2022)
Judgment
1. Joseph Mwita Nyamohanga was arraigned before Hon. Mesa, Senior Principal Magistrate Kehancha on a charge of manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code.
2. The particulars of the charge are that on 29/6/2021, at Maeta Village, Kuria East Sub County, with another not before the court, killed Peter Mtongori Nyabogwe.
3. On 5/7/2021, he appeared before the magistrate and pleaded guilty to the charge and was sentenced to serve 15 years imprisonment on 14/7/2021.
4. The appellant is aggrieved by the sentence and filed this appeal on the following grounds:-1. That he pleaded guilty to the offence;2. That the sentence imposed in manifestly excessive in the circumstances;3. That he is remorseful and regrets his actions and prays for this court to be merciful considering that he is the only bread winner of his family;4. That he has reformed during his stay in prison having been trained in capacity and partly trade that will assist him after his release.
6. He therefore prays for a reduction of his sentence or any other order the court grant.
6. The prosecution counsel filed submissions and opposed the appeal but having read the said submissions, they do not relate to the appellant’s petition. The appellant only appeals against sentence but not conviction. I will ignore the said submissions.
7. Before sentencing the appellant, the trial court called for a probation officer’s report. However, it was not favourable to his release on non-custodial sentence.
8. The prosecution stated that the appellant is a first offender. However, in the probation officer’s report the appellant was portrayed in a very negative way; that he is involved in criminal activities, thefts, is antisocial and was suspected to have been involved in the murder of three people there before though there was no evidence to link him to the murders; that his own family were not willing to have him released on non-custodial sentence since emotions were still high and there were fears of revenge attacks.
9. The appellant claims to regret his actions, is remorseful and has now learnt some trades while in prison and prays for the court’s leniency. I also consider the fact that the deceased lost his life in a most cruel manner. I do take into account the fact that the appellant pleaded guilty to the offence and did not waste the court’s time. The appellant was said to be a young man of twenty one (21) years and in my view, he should be given another chance. For the above reasons, I hereby allow this appeal to the extent that I set aside the sentence of 15 years imprisonment and substitute it with a sentence of 12 years imprisonment. The sentence will take effect from 5/7/2021 when he took plea. The appeal succeeds to that extent.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT MIGORI THIS 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023. R. WENDOHJUDGEIn presence of; -Mr. Kaino for the stateAppellant PresentEmma / Phelix –Court Assistant