[2005] KEHC 3147 (KLR)
The High Court found that the appellant was convicted on his own unequivocal plea of guilty, with the charge and facts read and admitted in Kiswahili. The trial court gave the appellant an opportunity to mitigate, considered the mitigating factors, and exercised its sentencing discretion appropriately. There was no...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KEHC 3147 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Victor Odhiambo Nduso; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 155 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Narcotic Possession, Plea of Guilty, Sentencing Discretion
- 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
Victor Odhiambo Nduso
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court failed to consider the appellant's mitigation before passing sentence.
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was excessive in the circumstances.
- 3 Whether the appellant's plea was unequivocal.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the appellant was convicted on his own unequivocal plea of guilty, with the charge and facts read and admitted in Kiswahili. The trial court gave the appellant an opportunity to mitigate, considered the mitigating factors, and exercised its sentencing discretion appropriately. There was no evidence that the trial court acted on the wrong principle, overlooked material factors, or imposed an excessive sentence. Therefore, the appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
8 paragraphs
REPULIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA Criminal Appeal 155 of 2004{Appeal against both conviction and sentence of the Senior Resident Magistrate’s court at Butere in Criminal Case No.979 of 2004 (B. O. OCHIENG ESQ., RM}
VICTOR ODHIAMBO NDUSO ………………………….……….. APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC ………………………………………………………. RESPONDENTJUDGEMENT In his Petition of Appeal, the Appellant, Victor Odhiambo Nduso, proffered three grounds in which he submitted that the trial court failed to consider his mitigation before passing sentence and that the sentence meted out to him was excessive. He also submitted that his plea was unequivocal.
The appellant was convicted by the Resident Magistrate at Butere, in Cr.C. No.979/04, on his own plea of guilty. The offence was being in possession of Narcotic Drug contrary to section 3(1) as read with section 4(a) of Act 4 of 1994. He was fined Shs.60,000/= and in default to a term of five years in prison.
The record shows that the charge was read to the appellant in Kiswahili as were the facts and that the appellant admitted both as true following which he was convicted. He was given an opportunity to mitigate which he did. The trial court considered the mitigating factors before passing sentence. The court also considered why a severe sentence was called for. The sentence was in the discretion of the trial court.
The appellant did not show that the trial court exercised that discretion on the wrong principle or overlooked material factors nor did he show that the sentence was excessive in the circumstances. In the light of this, I find no merit in the appeal and I dismiss it.
Dated at Kakamega this 11th day of November, 2005.
G. B. M. KARIUKI J U D G E