[2004] KEHC 1839 (KLR)
The court found that the sentence of four years imprisonment for each count, to run concurrently, was not excessive given the gravity of the offence and the statutory maximum of life imprisonment. The fact that the appellant was a first offender and pleaded guilty was considered, but the court held that the sentence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KEHC 1839 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Simon Kimutai Rotich; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kericho
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 29 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, First Offender, Grievous Harm, Penal Code Section 234
- 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
Simon Kimutai Rotich
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of four years imprisonment for each count of grievous harm was excessive for a first offender.
- 2 Whether the trial court exercised its discretion properly in sentencing the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the sentence of four years imprisonment for each count, to run concurrently, was not excessive given the gravity of the offence and the statutory maximum of life imprisonment. The fact that the appellant was a first offender and pleaded guilty was considered, but the court held that the sentence was in fact lenient in the circumstances. The appeal was therefore dismissed and the sentence upheld.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal against sentence is dismissed.
- The sentence of four years imprisonment for each count, to run concurrently, is upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
5 paragraphs
Simon Kimutai Rotich v Republic
High Court, at Kericho February 23, 2004 Musinga Ag J Criminal Appeal No 29 of 2002
The appellant pleaded guilty to two counts of grevious harm contrary to section 234 of the Penal Code and was sentenced to serve four (4) years in jail for each of the counts but the jail terms were run concurrently. He appealed against the sentence saying that it was excessive given that he was a first offender.
The state through Mr. Koech opposed the appeal and submitted that the offence with which the appellant was charged carried a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. He therefore urged the Court to uphold the sentence.
I have considered the appellant’s mitigation but I am satisfied that the sentence which was handed down to hm is very lenient. I therefore dismiss the appeal.