REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS H.CR.C 58 OF 2007 MUTINDA KIEKE ………………………APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC............................................RESPONDENT JUDGMENT 1. The Appellant was arrested on 3/3/2007 and later charged with the offence of being in possession of cannabis sativa contrary to section 3 (1) as read with section 2 (a) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Control Act No. 4 of 1994. He had 4 rolls of bhang and when he appeared for plea on 6/3/2007, he admitted the offence. 2. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison on 28/3/2007 the day the facts were read to him. I agree with Mr O’Mirera that it is good practice to take the plea and facts together, which did not happen in this case. 3. The Appeal is limited to sentence and the Appellant only says that he has a family to take care of and that the bhang was for his own use. 4. An appellate court can only interfere with sentence if the trial court misapplied or misapprehended the law applicable. In this case, the plea may have been poorly taken and injustice occasioned to the Appellant. However, he admitted the offence. 5. it. The sentence in my view is however harsh in the circumstances and I deem it proper to interfere with 6. I will allow the Appeal to the extent that the sentence is reduced to a sentence of two (2) years from the date the Appellant was sentenced i.e. 28/3/2007. 7. Orders accordingly. Dated and delivered at Machakos this 3rd day of April 2008. ISAAC LENAOLA JUDGE
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.