Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealDismissedCriminal Appeal No. 76 of 2002

Isaiah Kisur Korinyang v Republic [2002] KECA 89 (KLR)

Court of Appeal
27 September 2002
KWKwachPhilip Kiptoo TunoiTunoiBOBosire
199 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal dismissed Isaiah Korinyang's criminal appeal in full, meaning his High Court conviction and sentence from Kitale remain standing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This document is not a reasoned judgment but the certified order of the Court of Appeal at Nakuru dismissing Criminal Appeal No. 76 of 2002. The appeal was brought by Isaiah Kisur Korinyang against a conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court of Kenya at Kitale (Nambuye J) on 27 October 2000 in High Court Criminal Case No. 1 of 1998, in which the Republic was prosecutor. The coram comprised Kwach, Tunoi and Bosire, Judges of Appeal. Counsel were heard on 23 September 2002, R. Mungai Mbugua appearing for the appellant and J. O. Onyango for the respondent, whereupon the appeal was stood over for judgment. On 27 September 2002 the court pronounced a one-line disposition: the appeal was dismissed. The order contains no issues for determination, no summary of the grounds argued, no evaluation of the evidence, no citation of authority, no discussion of the law and no costs order. No judge wrote separately; the disposition issues as a single order of the court, given under the hand and seal of the Deputy Registrar at Nakuru and certified as a true copy. Its effect is that the conviction and sentence of the High Court stand undisturbed, the appeal having failed in its entirety. Because the document records no reasoning, this brief can extract no holdings, binding propositions or cited authorities; the only quotable passage is the operative dismissal order. Advocates should note that the appellant's surname appears as 'Korinyang' in the appeal caption but as 'Kurinyang' in the reproduced High Court caption. The reasons, if any were ever delivered, lie in a fuller judgment not contained in this document.

Key legal issues

#

Legal principles established

#

    Court orders

    #
    1. 1.The appeal be and is hereby dismissed.

    The bench

    #

    One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

    KW
    majority
    Philip Kiptoo Tunoi
    majority
    BO
    majority
    On appeal from
    High Court of Kenya at Kitale
    High Court Criminal Case No. 1 of 1998
    Jurisdiction invoked
    Not stated on the face of the document. It records an appeal to the Court of Appeal at Nakuru against a conviction and sentence of the High Court of Kenya at Kitale; no constitutional or statutory provision is invoked in the order.

    Relief refused

    #

    Allowance of the appeal against the conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court of Kenya at Kitale (Nambuye J) on 27 October 2000

    The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal in its entirety; the order records no reasons and makes no costs order.

    p. 1

    Costs

    No costs order was made; the order is silent as to costs.

    Quotable passages

    #

    Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.

    this appeal coming up for judgment this day IT IS ORDERED that this appeal be and is hereby dismissed.
    p. 1Final orders - dismissal of the appeal

    Issues in the judgment

    #
    material

    The document is an extracted, certified copy of a bare order of dismissal, not a reasoned judgment: it contains no issues for determination, no summary of the grounds argued, no evaluation of evidence, no citation of authority and no costs order, so no holdings or binding propositions can be extracted from it.

    minor

    The appellant's surname is spelled inconsistently within the same document: 'KORINYANG' in the appeal caption but 'Kurinyang' in the reproduced High Court caption.

    Key timeline

    #

    Practical implications

    #

    Frequently asked questions

    #

    Later judgments citing this (1)

    #

    Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

    Cite this brief

    #

    Cite this brief

    Caselaw, "Isaiah Kisur Korinyang v Republic [2002] KECA 89 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2002). Criminal Appeal No. 76 of 2002. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2002/89/eng@2002-09-27

    Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.