[2024] KEHC 3490 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant, having pleaded guilty to a first offence of stealing and having demonstrated remorse and positive reform while in custody, was suitable for a non-custodial sentence. The probation report supported this conclusion, and the prison authorities confirmed the applicant's reformation....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 3490 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Edward Thio’ngo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E059 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Sentence Review Ruling
- Outcome
- Custodial sentence revised to probation for the remaining period of 13 months.
- Judges
- RN Nyakundi
- Legal Topics
- Sentence Review, Probation Orders, Plea of Guilty, Non Custodial Sentencing
- 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
Edward Thio’ngo
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Sentence Review Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is suitable for a non-custodial sentence in light of the probation report and relevant sentencing factors.
- 2 Whether the original custodial sentence should be revised to a probation sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant, having pleaded guilty to a first offence of stealing and having demonstrated remorse and positive reform while in custody, was suitable for a non-custodial sentence. The probation report supported this conclusion, and the prison authorities confirmed the applicant's reformation. The court held that, in light of the sentencing guidelines and the applicant's circumstances, a probation sentence for the remainder of the term was appropriate to facilitate his reintegration into the community. The custodial sentence was therefore revised to a probation order for the remaining 13 months, with compliance to be monitored by monthly probation officer reports.
Court Disposition
Custodial sentence revised to probation for the remaining period of 13 months.
Orders
- The applicant shall serve a probation sentence for the remaining period of 13 months.
- Monthly reports shall be filed in court by the probation officer to ensure compliance.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Thio’ngo v Republic (Criminal Revision E059 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 3490 (KLR) (11 April 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 3490 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Eldoret
Criminal Revision E059 of 2024
RN Nyakundi, J
April 11, 2024
Between
Edward Thio’ngo
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
Representation:Mark Mugun for the state 1. The applicant was charged with the offence of stealing contrary to section 268 as read with section 275 of the penal code. The particulars of the offence are that on 16th November, 2022 at around 0800hrs at Kipkaren estate in Langas Pioneer location of Kapseret sub-county within Uasin Gishu County, stole a motor cycle reg No, KMFC 234R TVS, blue in color valued at Kshs. 167,000/=, the property of Hezbon Onyancha.
2. The applicant pleaded guilty to the offence and as a consequence, he was convicted on his own plea of guilty and sentenced to serve three years imprisonment.
3. The applicant has approached this court pursuant to sections 357,362,364& 382 of the Criminal Procedure Code as construed with Article 50(2) (p) & (q) as conjunctively read with Article 50(6)(a)&(b) of the Constitution.
4. The applicant seeks a sentence review based on the Probation sentence report filed on 25th March, 2024. The report is responsive and recommends him for a probation sentence.
5. In determining whether to impose a custodial or non-custodial sentence, the court is required to take into account the following factors: -a)Gravity of the offence: - sentence of imprisonment should be avoided for misdemeanour.b)Criminal history of the offender. Taking into account the seriousness of the offences, first offenders should be considered for non-custodial sentence.c)Character of the offender: - non-custodial sentence are best suited for offenders who are already remorseful and receptive to rehabilitative measures.d)Protection of the community: - where the offender is likely to pose a threat to the community.e)Offender’s responsibility to third parties: - where there are people depending on the offender.f)Children in conflict with the law: - non- custodial orders should be imposed as a matter of course in cases of children in conflict with law, except in circumstances where, in light of the seriousness of the offence coupled with other factors, the court is satisfied that a custodial order is the most appropriate.
6. Considering all these factors in totality, the applicant is suitable to serve a non-custodial sentence. He is receptive to a non-custodial sentence. The prison authorities indicated that he has reformed. I am of the opinion that if the applicant is fit for reintegration back to the community, I should not hold him back. Let him go out and benefit from a probation sentence. I direct that he serves a probation sentence for the remaining period of 13 months. Monthly reports shall be filed in court by the probation officer in ensuring compliance.
SIGNED, DATE AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 11THDAY OF APRIL 2024. ..................................R. NYAKUNDIJUDGE