[2015] KEHC 4099 (KLR)
The court held that since the appellant pleaded guilty and was convicted on his own plea, the only issue for determination was the legality and appropriateness of the sentence. The trial magistrate exercised discretion and imposed a sentence of seven years, which is well within the statutory maximum of twenty years...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 4099 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Pascal Oyoo Ogutu; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisii
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 121 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- J Wakiaga
- Legal Topics
- Narcotic Offences, Sentencing Principles, Plea of Guilty, Appeal on Sentence
- 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
Pascal Oyoo Ogutu
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed on the appellant was illegal or excessively high so as to warrant interference by the appellate court.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that since the appellant pleaded guilty and was convicted on his own plea, the only issue for determination was the legality and appropriateness of the sentence. The trial magistrate exercised discretion and imposed a sentence of seven years, which is well within the statutory maximum of twenty years for the offence. There was no illegality or manifest excessiveness in the sentence to warrant appellate interference. The appeal was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal against sentence is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISII
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 121 OF 2013
BETWEEN
PASCAL OYOO OGUTU…............................................................ APPELLANT
AND
REPUBLIC ….............................................................................. RESPONDENT
(Being appeal from the conviction and sentence of Hon. A.K. Mokoross Ag. SRM
dated 17th June 2013 in the original Kilgoris Criminal Case No.428 of 2013. )
JUDGMENT
1. The appellant PASCAL OYOO OGUTU was charged with the offence of being in possession of Narcotic drugs contrary to Section 3(1) as read with Section (2) (a) of NARCOTIC AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT No. 4 of 1994 the particulars of which were that on 15th day of June 2012 at Kisumu Ndogo estate Kilgoris township in Transmara West District of Narok was found being in possession of canabis sativa (bhang) to wit 40 rolls of street valued at Kshs.5,000/= in contravention of the said act.
2. He pleaded guilty to the said charges and was convicted on his on plea of guilt and sentenced to seven (7) years imprisonment.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the sentence and with leave of this honourable court he filed this appeal and against sentence on the ground that he was suffering from high blood pressure and was the bread winner to the rest of his family as his parents are suffering from HIV & AIDS.
4. Section 348 of C.P.C. States that his appeal shall be allowed in the case of an accused person who has pleaded guilty and has been convicted on his own plea by a subordinate court except to the extent or legality of the sentence.
5. The only issue therefore for attention determination in this appeal on sentence is whether the said was illegal and excessively high so as to be set aside by the appellant court.
6. It should be noted that under Section 3(2) (a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Control Act under which the appellant was charged in possession guilty of the offence is liable imprisonment for twenty years.
7. Since the trial magistrate used his discretion and sentenced the appellant to seven (7) years and found no illegality but the said sentence and therefore find no merit with the appellant appeal herein which I hereby dismissed.
8. Now that the appellant appeal has been dismissed it is my considered view that the issues raised by the appellant in his grounds of appeal herein that is to say that he is the sole bread winner for his family are appropriate grounds to be considered in the revision exercise by the court at an appropriate time.
Delivered, signed and dated at Kisii this 2nd day of July 2015.
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Miss. Mojale advocate for the accused.
Appellant in person.