REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU Criminal Appeal 232 of 2008 OLOTOISHE LORANGAI…………..………………APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………..………….RESPONDENT JUDGMENT The court has considered the appellant’s appeal which is in the nature of mitigation. The conviction itself is not challenged, which means that the appellant accepts that he was properly convicted on sound grounds and that the trial court neither erred nor misdirected itself in so doing. Considering that the sentence of 20 years imprisonment is a minimum sentence prescribed under section 8(3) of the Sexual Offences Act, I have no discretion in that regard and my hands are tied. As clearly held in the case of JOHNSON MUIRURI vs. R [1983] KLR 445 a minimum sentence cannot be challenged as harsh or excessive. In the circumstances I have no option but to dismiss the appeal which I hereby do. The appellant shall serve his sentence. Orders accordingly. Dated, signed and delivered this 5th day of June, 2009 M. G. MUGO 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.