[2012] KEHC 1562 (KLR)
Although the statutory maximum sentence for handling stolen property is fourteen years, the trial court imposed a four-year sentence for goods valued at Ksh 2,145/=. The High Court found this sentence harsh given the low value of the goods and the appellant's positive probation report. The appellant had already...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 1562 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Peter Kilonzo Nthenge; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 400 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- sentence varied; custodial sentence substituted with non-custodial probation supervision
- Judges
- RPV Wendoh, MJA Emukule
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Handling Stolen Property, Robbery With Violence, 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
Peter Kilonzo Nthenge
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of four years imprisonment for handling stolen goods worth Ksh 2,145/= was harsh or excessive.
- 2 Whether the appellant should be granted a non-custodial sentence based on the probation report.
Ratio Decidendi
Although the statutory maximum sentence for handling stolen property is fourteen years, the trial court imposed a four-year sentence for goods valued at Ksh 2,145/=. The High Court found this sentence harsh given the low value of the goods and the appellant's positive probation report. The appellant had already spent nearly two years in custody before sentencing. The court accepted the probation officer's recommendation for a non-custodial sentence and ordered the appellant's release from prison, directing that he serve the balance of his term under probation supervision at Maina Chief's Camp.
Court Disposition
sentence varied; custodial sentence substituted with non-custodial probation supervision
Orders
- The appellant is released from prison.
- The appellant shall serve the balance of his term at Maina Chief's Camp under the direction of the Probation Officer Nyandarua North.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Nakuru
Criminal Appeal 400 of 2010 [if gte mso 9]><xml>
14. 00
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; text-autospace:ideograph-other; font-size:12. 0pt;"Liberation Serif","serif";} </style> <![endif]
PETER KILONZO NTHENGE................................................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC............................................................................................RESPONDENT
(From original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No. 952 of 2009 of the Principal Magistrate's Court at Nyahururu)
JUDGMENT
The Appellant was charged with the offence of robbery with violence contrary to Section 296 (2) of the Penal Code (Cap. 63, Laws of Kenya) and the alternative charge of handling stolen goods contrary to Section 322 (2) of the Penal Code.
He was, on the evidence, acquitted of the offence of robbery with violence but was found guilty of the alternative charge of handling stolen goods and sentenced to four years imprisonment. He has not challenged his conviction but has instead appealed against his sentence, saying that he has now served one year's imprisonment and that he has learnt his lesson and he is remorseful, and that his sentence should be reduced and if possible allow his appeal on sentence, and send him home a free man.
Miss Idagwa learned State Counsel who appeared for the Republic opposed the appeal on sentence and stated that this was a retributive sentence, it was both right and lenient.
The punishment for handling stolen property under Section 322(2) of the Penal Code is imprisonment with hard labour for a term of not exceeding fourteen years.The sentence of four years therefore appears very lenient.The learned trial magistrate does not say what influenced her decision in sentencing the appellant to four years imprisonment. However from the particulars of the offence, the total value of the goods handled amounted to Ksh 2,145/=. This is probably what influenced the learned trial court's decision.
For the same reasons a sentence of four (4) years for handling stolen property worth shs 2,145/= is rather harsh.
The Appellant was sentenced to four years imprisonment on 19th November 2010. He had however been in custody from about 10th April 2009, and that is a period of nearly two years from his arrest and placed in custody.
This court called for a Probation Report and from the Report Ref. PRI/VOL.VI/056, filed in court on 17th September 2012, the Appellant has been positively described and the Probation Officer recommends him for a non-custodial sentence.
We have considered the Report and accept its recommendation. We therefore direct that the Appellant be released from prison and direct that he does serve the balance of his term at Maina Chief's Campin Maina Location under the direction of the Probation Officer Nyandarua North.
There shall be orders accordingly.
Dated, signed and delivered at Nakuru this 9th day of October, 2012
R. V. P. WENDOH
JUDGE
M.J. ANYARA EMUKULE
JUDGE