[2002] KEHC 1262 (KLR)
The court found that none of the complainants was injured during the robberies and that the offences, while serious, did not warrant the more severe conviction and sentence for robbery with violence. Both the appellant and the State agreed to the substitution of the convictions to simple robbery under section 296(1)...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2002] KEHC 1262 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Vincent Omondi Ahenda; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 779 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment After Appeal Hearing
- Outcome
- conviction substituted; sentence varied
- Legal Topics
- Robbery, Sentencing, Conviction Substitution, Remission of 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
Vincent Omondi Ahenda
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment After Appeal Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the convictions for robbery with violence should be substituted with convictions for simple robbery under section 296(1) of the Penal Code.
- 2 Whether the death sentence should be set aside in light of the circumstances of the case.
- 3 What is the appropriate sentence for the appellant given the facts and mitigation presented.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that none of the complainants was injured during the robberies and that the offences, while serious, did not warrant the more severe conviction and sentence for robbery with violence. Both the appellant and the State agreed to the substitution of the convictions to simple robbery under section 296(1) of the Penal Code. The court also considered the appellant's lack of previous convictions, the period spent in remand, and his remorse. Consequently, the court substituted the convictions on each count to simple robbery, set aside the death sentence, and imposed a sentence of four years imprisonment on each count to run concurrently, plus one stroke of the cane on each count,...
Court Disposition
conviction substituted; sentence varied
Orders
- Convictions on each of the seven counts substituted to robbery contrary to section 296(1) of the Penal Code.
- Death sentence set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
106 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 779 OF 1999
(From Original Conviction and Sentence in Criminal Case No.295 of 1998 of the Principal Magistrate’s Court at Maseno
VINCENT OMONDI AHENDA………………………..…APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC……………………………………………RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
Mr. Agina for the appellant has informed us that the appellant now admits that he committed the robberies for which he was convicted as charged. The appellant has also said so us. Mr. Agina, the learned advocate for the appellant, has urged us to substitute the convictions against the appellant on each count for Robbery, contrary to section296(1), P.C. as none of the complainants was injured.
The evidence on record in the court below was that the appellant and his cronies, on 2nd April, 1998, traveled with the complainants in Matango Bus together towards Siaya District of Nyanza Province and on the way the appellant and others with him robbed the complainants as charged and convicted.
In considering the request for the substitution we note that none of the complainants was injured in the course of the robberies and that the robberies in the instant case were not so serious in nature. It is our considered view that this is a suitable case for the substitution of the conviction, contrary to section 296(1), P.C on each count. Mr. Okello, the learned State Counsel for the Republic also concurs to it.
The appellant had no previous count and was in remand for about 14 months. There is no remission for Robbery sentence.
ORDER
We substitute the conviction against the appellant on each of the seven counts for Robbery, contrary to section 296(1), P.C. and set aside the death sentence. We sentence the appellant to 4 years imprisonment on each count with effect from 14-6-99 to run concurrently plus one stroke on each count.
Dated and delivered this 7th day of March, 2002.
V.V. PATEL
JUDGE
W. TUIYOT
JUDGE
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 779 OF 1999
(From Original Conviction and Sentence in Criminal Case No.295 of 1998 of the Principal Magistrate’s Court at Maseno)
VINCENT OMONDI AHENDA………………………..…APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC………………………………….…………RESPONDENT
P R O C E E D I N GS
17/9/2001
Coram: Mbogholi, J
For State – Omwega
Appellant present in person – represented by Mr. Agina
Kugwa – court clerk
Court: Hearing on 15/10/2001.
MBOGHOLI-MSAGHA
JUDGE
15/10/2001:
Coram:Mbogholi, J
Mbito, J
Mr. Omwega for state
Appellant – reply Mr. Agina
Ndungu – court clerk Kugwa court clerk
Mr. Kiage: I hold brief for Mr. Agina. He has just served an amended petition upon this state counsel.
Mr. Omwega:
I have been served. I need time.
MBOGHOLI-MSAGHA
JUDGE
15/10/2001
Mr. Kiage:
We apply to put in an amended petition of appeal and the petition be filed.
MBOGHOLI-MSAGHA
JUDGE
15/10/2001
Order:
Leave to file amended petition of appeal granted. For mention on 14/11/2001.
MBOGHOLI-MSAGHA
JUDGE
15/10/2001
14/11/2001:
Coram: Mbito J
Agina for Appellant
Ms Nyamosi for State
Ndungu – court clerk
Mr. Agina:
I ask for a date.
Ms. Nyamosi: I have not looked at the file.
Order:
As the dates of this term are now full, matter hereby adjourned to the next callover, when a date will be fixed on priority basis.
G.P. MBITO
JUDGE
14/1/2002:
Coram: Mbogholi, J
Miss Nyamosi for State – for appellant
Appellant in person
Kugwa – Court clerk
Hearing on 21/1/2002.
MBOGHOLI-MSAGHA
JUDGE
21/1/2002:
Before V.V. Patel, J
Tuyoit, J
Appellant present
Agina for him
Okello, State counsel Court:
By consent hearing now on 26/2/2002.
V.V. PATEL
JUDGE
W.K. TUYOIT
JUDGE
26/2/2002
Before V.V. Patel, J
Tuyoit, J
Appellant present
Agina for him
Okello state counsel Agina:
The appellant now admits that he committed the robberies for which he was convicted on count Nos.1, 2,3,6,8,11 and 12. I pray substitution the said convictions for Robbery contrary to section 296(1), P.C. and set aside the death sentence.
The appellant had no previous conviction. He was in remand for about 1½. He is full of remorse for what he did.
Pray for utmost leniency. None was injured. Appellant: That is so.
Okello, State counsel
I do not object to the substitution.
Robbery is a serious offence. However, none was injured in the cause of the robberies.
Court: Judgment on 7/3/2002.
V.V. PATEL
JUDGE
26/2/2002