Jackson Mutisya Daudi v Republic [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Machakos
Category
Criminal
Judge(s)
D. K. Kemei
Judgment Date
October 13, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the Jackson Mutisya Daudi v Republic [2020] eKLR case summary, highlighting key legal findings, implications, and context relevant for legal professionals and scholars.

Case Brief: Jackson Mutisya Daudi v Republic [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Jackson Mutisya Daudi v. Republic
- Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 114 of 2019
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Machakos
- Date Delivered: October 13, 2020
- Category of Law: Criminal
- Judge(s): D. K. Kemei
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The court must resolve the following central legal issues:
- Was sufficient evidence adduced before the lower court to prove the ingredients of the offence of attempted murder to the requisite standard?
- Did the trial court err in failing to consider the appellant’s defence?
- Was the sentence meted on the appellant excessive warranting a review downwards?

3. Facts of the Case:
The appellant, Jackson Mutisya Daudi, was charged with attempted murder under Section 220(a) of the Penal Code for allegedly shooting Joseph Musinga Timothy on October 14, 2014, at Kinanie Trading Center. The appellant denied the charges and was subsequently convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by the Senior Principal Magistrate. The appellant raised several grounds of appeal, including insufficient evidence, improper identification, and dismissal of his alibi defence.

4. Procedural History:
The case originated from Machakos Law Courts where the appellant was tried and convicted. Following the conviction and sentencing on May 17, 2019, the appellant filed an appeal challenging the trial court's findings and the harshness of the sentence. The appeal included arguments regarding the prosecution's failure to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt and the dismissal of the appellant's alibi.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered Section 220(a) of the Penal Code, which defines attempted murder, and Section 388, which outlines the elements of an attempt. It requires proof of intent to unlawfully cause death, an overt act towards that intention, and the participation of the accused.
- Case Law: The court referenced *Okeno v Republic* [1972] EA 32, emphasizing the obligation of the appellate court to re-evaluate evidence. It also cited *Abdi Ali Bare v Republic* (2015) eKLR regarding the distinction between preparation and attempt in attempted murder cases and *Roria v Republic* (1967) EA 583 on the reliability of identification evidence.
- Application: The court found that the prosecution had established the appellant's intent and participation in the shooting. The evidence from eyewitnesses, particularly Pw1, who identified the appellant and testified about the circumstances of the shooting, was deemed credible. The court also evaluated the conditions of the identification and found them sufficient to support the conviction. The dismissal of the alibi was justified as it did not undermine the prosecution's case, which was supported by substantial evidence.

6. Conclusion:
The court upheld the conviction, finding that the prosecution had proven the elements of attempted murder beyond a reasonable doubt. However, it found the life sentence excessive, given the circumstances and the appellant's status as a first offender. The sentence was reduced to twenty years imprisonment, reflecting a more appropriate punishment considering the mitigating factors.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the case.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya upheld the conviction of Jackson Mutisya Daudi for attempted murder but reduced his sentence from life imprisonment to twenty years. The decision emphasized the importance of sufficient evidence and proper identification in criminal cases while also considering mitigating factors in sentencing. This case underscores the balance between upholding justice for victims and ensuring fair treatment of the accused within the legal system.

Citations:
- Penal Code, Section 220(a), Section 388.
- *Okeno v Republic* [1972] EA 32.
- *Abdi Ali Bare v Republic* (2015) eKLR.
- *Roria v Republic* (1967) EA 583.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Jackson-Mutisya-Daudi-v-Republic-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1854_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries