Leshian & another v Republic (Criminal Appeal E019 of 2022) [2026] KECA 1422 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal reduced a murder conviction to manslaughter and cut a 20-year sentence to 12 years, crediting time already served since 2019.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the conviction for murder should stand, in light of the prosecution's concession that the circumstances pointed to manslaughter
- 2.Whether the sentence of twenty (20) years imprisonment was excessive and ought to be interfered with on appeal
Key legal issues
#Whether the appellate court may interfere with the trial court's sentence
The Court applied the settled test that interference is warranted only where the sentence is manifestly excessive or the trial court overlooked material factors, took into account wrong material, or acted on a wrong principle; on reducing the conviction to manslaughter, the 20-year sentence failed that test
Relying on Bernard Kimani Gacheru v Republic and Ogolla s/o Owuor v Republic, the Court treated sentence as a matter of trial-court discretion. However, once the murder conviction was reduced to manslaughter by concession, the 20-year term was no longer commensurate. There was no evidence of premeditation, the provocation and cause of the commotion were unclear, and the appellants were first offenders with mitigation on record. A reduced custodial term of 12 years was imposed.
Whether the conviction for murder should be upheld
Following the prosecution's concession at the plenary hearing, the Court set aside the conviction for murder and substituted a conviction for manslaughter
At the plenary hearing, prosecution counsel conceded, without objection from defence counsel, that the circumstances under which the offence was committed did not point to murder. The Court accordingly set aside the murder conviction and substituted manslaughter, after which argument was confined to sentence.
Legal principles established
#- An appellate court will not interfere with a trial court's sentence unless it is manifestly excessive, or the trial court overlooked a material factor, took into account wrong material, or acted on a wrong principle
- An appellate court does not alter a sentence unless the trial judge acted upon wrong principles or overlooked some material factors
Court orders
#- 1.The conviction for murder was set aside and substituted with a conviction on manslaughter
- 2.The appeal against sentence is allowed and the sentence of twenty (20) years against each of the appellants is set aside
- 3.Each appellant is sentenced to twelve (12) years imprisonment
- 4.The sentence of twelve (12) years imprisonment for each appellant shall run from 3rd June 2019 when they were first produced before the court
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Kisii
- Not stated in the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal to the Court of Appeal against conviction and sentence on a charge of murder under section 203 read with section 204 of the Penal Code; the judgment does not expressly cite the jurisdictional provision (see dataQualityFlags)
Relief refused
#Reduction of sentence to the period already served
The Court found the 20-year sentence excessive but substituted a fixed 12-year term rather than time served, considering the circumstances of the offence, mitigation and first-offender status
Costs
No costs order was made in the judgment
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.
Consequently, the appeal against sentence is allowed, the sentence of twenty (20) years against each of the appellants is hereby set aside and in place therefor, each appellant is sentenced to twelve (12) years imprisonment.
The sentence of twelve (12) years imprisonment for each appellant shall therefore run from 3rd June 2019 when they were first produced before the court.
On appeal, the appellate court will note easily interfere with sentence unless, that sentence is manifestly excessive in the circumstances of the case, or the trial court overlooked some material factor, or took into account some wrong material, or acted on a wrong principle.
Mr. Okeyo, learned prosecution counsel, graciously conceded to the appeal against conviction for murder. Mr. Ogenga, learned counsel for the appellants not objecting, the conviction for murder was set aside and substituted with a conviction on manslaughter.
Issues in the judgment
#The joint memorandum of appeal is dated 19th February 2026 and the hearing on 27th April 2026, yet the offence and arrest date from 2019; the memorandum date of 2026 may be a typographical error for an earlier year, but no conflicting internal passage exists
The judgment does not state the appeal number, the trial court case number, or the constitutional/statutory basis of the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction
The judgment does not record the name of the trial judge or the date of the decision appealed from
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Leshian & another v Republic (Criminal Appeal E019 of 2022) [2026] KECA 1422 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/1422/eng@2026-07-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.