[2003] KEHC 153 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant was addressed in Kiswahili, a language he understood fluently, as evidenced by his participation in the appeal hearing. The record showed that the appellant was twice warned of the seriousness of the charge and the mandatory death sentence before pleading guilty. The appellant's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2003] KEHC 153 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Peter Karuga alias Muriu; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 537 of ??
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Robbery With Violence, Plea of Guilty, Language of Proceedings, Sentencing, Appeals 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
Peter Karuga alias Muriu
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant understood the language of the proceedings and the consequences of pleading guilty.
- 2 Whether the plea of guilty was unequivocal and valid under the law.
- 3 Whether the sentence imposed was legal and proper.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant was addressed in Kiswahili, a language he understood fluently, as evidenced by his participation in the appeal hearing. The record showed that the appellant was twice warned of the seriousness of the charge and the mandatory death sentence before pleading guilty. The appellant's admissions were clear and unequivocal, and he confirmed the correctness of the facts presented by the prosecution. The court concluded that the plea was properly taken, the conviction was lawful, and the sentence was both mandatory and legal. There was no merit in the appeal, and it was dismissed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- Right of appeal explained to the appellant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 537 OF 2000
(From Original Conviction and Sentence in Traffic Case No. 1288 of 2000 of The Principal Magistrate’s Court at Machakos)
PETER KARUGA ALIAS MURIU…………………………...APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC…………………………………………………..RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
The appellant was among nine people charged with three counts of Robbery with violence C/s 296(2) of The Penal Code. The record shows that all but the appellant denied the offences. On conviction the appellant was sentenced to death. This appeal arises out of that conviction.
In his appeal the appellant says he did not understand either Kiswahili or English. He was also not warned of the consequences of pleading guilty to the charge.
We have gone through the original record. It is clear the charge was read to the appellant in Kiswahili language. At the hearing of this appeal he addressed the court in Kiswahili language fluently. We have no doubt that he knows and understands the language well.
In answer to count one, he said
“It is true I participated in the robbery but my co-accused were not involved.”
In count two he said “It is true”. The record then reads as follows:
“Court: The third accused has been warned that he offences charged are capital offences and carry a mandatory death sentence. The charge will be read to him again. Charge read over and explained to the third accused in Kiswahili and he replies as follows:
Count 1: It is true P.G.E.
Later in the afternoon one the same date the plea was taken, detailed facts were given to the court by he prosecutor to which the appellant answered “The facts are correct” he was treated as a first offender as his records had not been received.
In mitigation the appellant addressed the court thus:
“I am an orphan. I know the seriousness of the offence. I have a wife and children. My colleagues here are suffering for nothing as I just pointed them out.
The court then proceeded to sentence the appellant and in so doing said:
“Twice the accused has been warned of the seriousness of the charge and what entails a conviction. On each of the three counts he is sentenced to death”
It is clear to us that he plea was an unequivocal admission of the offence and the record cannot be faulted. Section 348 of the Criminal Procedure code is clear that no appeal arising there from shall be allowed except as to the extent or legality of the sentence. The sentence is mandatory and legal.
We see no merit in this appeal which is hereby dismissed. Right of appeal explained.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 4th day of June 2003.
MBOGHOLI MSAGHA
JUDGE
R.M MUTITU
JUDGE
Mr Bofwoli for the state