Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Morareni & another v Republic [2025] KEHC 1100 (KLR)
The High Court set aside criminal proceedings after finding the accused were convicted before charges were properly withdrawn, and noted they should have been charged separately.
Morareni & another v Republic [2025] KEHC 16697 (KLR)
The High Court set aside criminal proceedings after finding irregularities in post-plea procedure, including withdrawal of charges after conviction and re-reading charges after conviction.
Ojwang v Republic [2024] KEHC 1135 (KLR)
The High Court found that the appellant's plea was not unequivocal because his mitigation statement provided a justification for the act, amounting to a defence. The trial court failed to enter a plea of not guilty and proceed to a full hearing, as required when a defence is raised during mitigation. The court emphasized that the requirements for taking a plea, including ensuring the accused understands the charge and its consequences, were not fully met. Consequently, the conviction and sentence could not stand, and a retrial was ordered to allow the appellant's defence to be properly consid…
Source excerpt
KOO v Republic [2021] KEHC 5632 (KLR)
The High Court quashed a conviction and sentence after finding that the guilty plea was not unequivocal, the facts were inadequate, and no conviction had been entered.
Calistus Muyuga Omollo v Republic [2020] KEHC 7620 (KLR)
The court found that the trial court failed to enter a conviction after the appellant admitted the facts, proceeding directly to mitigation and sentencing. This omission rendered the sentence unlawful, as a person cannot be sentenced without a conviction. The court held that this procedural defect was sufficient to allow the appeal and set aside the sentence. Considering the appellant had already served eight years in custody and the likelihood that a retrial would not serve the interests of justice, the court declined to order a retrial and ordered the appellant's release unless otherwise la…
Source excerpt
Patrick Mateba Jeremani v Republic [2019] KEHC 8642 (KLR)
The High Court found that the plea taking process in the trial court was ambiguous and did not comply with the mandatory requirements of section 207 of the Criminal Procedure Code and established case law. The record was unclear as to the appellant's presence, gender, and understanding of the charges. The trial court failed to explain the consequences of a guilty plea and the severity of the sentence to the unrepresented appellant. The court emphasized that the trial magistrate must act as an educator and protector of the accused's rights, especially in serious offences with severe penalties.…
Source excerpt
Moses Kimani Thuo & Sadison Wanjohi Njoroge v Republic [2017] KEHC 753 (KLR)
The High Court quashed a conviction and set aside a sentence after holding that the guilty plea was equivocal because the facts were never read to the accused.
Mohammed Omar v Republic [2017] KEHC 498 (KLR)
The court found that, upon reviewing both the handwritten and typed records, the appellant's plea was unequivocal. The appellant confirmed the facts as correct after they were read out, and his mitigation statement further indicated an admission of guilt. The court was satisfied that the appellant understood the proceedings, was given an opportunity to mitigate, and that the requirements for a proper plea were met. Consequently, the conviction and sentence were lawful, and there was no basis to interfere with the trial court's decision.
Source excerpt
Haron Kibet Rutto v Republic [2017] KEHC 265 (KLR)
The High Court quashed a defilement conviction after finding the guilty plea was not unequivocal because the accused was not properly warned of the consequences.
Wilson Lolima v Republic [2015] KEHC 33 (KLR)
The High Court dismissed a rape appeal, holding that the appellant’s guilty plea was unequivocal and barred a merits appeal under section 348 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Explore more
