[1990] KECA 39 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal held that the identification of the appellant was reliable and free from error. The attack occurred in a well-lit area, the appellant was in close physical contact with the complainant and his girlfriend, and both victims knew the appellant well. The appellant's hat, intended to conceal his...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1990] KECA 39 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Opondo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 189 of 1988
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal to the Court of Appeal From High Court Dismissal of Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Robbery With Violence, Identification Evidence, 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
Opondo
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal to the Court of Appeal From High Court Dismissal of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant was properly identified as the person who attacked and robbed the complainant.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court of Appeal held that the identification of the appellant was reliable and free from error. The attack occurred in a well-lit area, the appellant was in close physical contact with the complainant and his girlfriend, and both victims knew the appellant well. The appellant's hat, intended to conceal his identity, fell off during the struggle, further facilitating recognition. The complainant reported the incident to the police immediately, providing details of the appellant's identity. The court found that there was no need for an identification parade in these circumstances. Accordingly, the court was satisfied that the appellant was properly identified as the perpetrator, and...
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
crim app 189 of 88
OPONDO………..........…APPELLANT
V
REPUBLIC………….RESPONDENT
Judgment.
The appellant was convicted of robbery with violence contrary to section 296(1) of the Penal Code and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment and six strokes of the cane followed by 5 years mandatory police supervision. His appeal to the High Court against both conviction and sentence was dismissed and he now appeals to this court. In his petition of appeal , the appellant has raised a number of grounds but the only substantial issue of law raised in this second appeal is whether the appellant was properly identified as the person who attacked and robbed the complainant.
The evidence which was accepted by the trial court was that the appellant attacked the complainant as he was walking home with his girlfriend shortly after midnight. The complainant, a matatu conductor, had gone to Thumaina Bar in Langalanga Estate, Nakuru, to collect his girlfriend. The appellant grabbed the complainant’s girlfriend and when the complainant interceded, the appellant attacked him with an unidentified object and he fell down unconscious. As he lay unconscious, the appellant robbed him of cash and a watch.
The area where the attack took place was brightly lighted with street lights and security lights as well. The appellant was in physical contact with both the complainant and his girlfriend. In the course of the struggle, the hat which the appellant was wearing, obviously to hide his face and avoid identification, fell down and both his victims recognised him as Coxy a man they knew very well and was a well known personality in the neighbourhood. As the complainant recgnised the appellant and reported to the police immediately with details, there was really no need for an identification parade.
We have, like the trial and first appellate courts, analysed the evidence and are satisfied that the conditions in which the appellant was identified were most favourable and quite free from the possibility of error. The lighting was adequate and the appellant was well known to his victims.
In result, this appeal fails and is ordered to be dismissed