A man who pleaded guilty to threatening to kill a patron at a nightclub has lost his appeal against both his conviction and sentence.
Ronald Koech Kipyegon was convicted on his own plea of guilty by the Senior Principal Magistrate's Court in Sotik of threatening to kill and creating a disturbance likely to cause a breach of the peace.
The offences occurred on July 9, 2025, at about 1.20am at a nightclub in Sotik town.
Kipyegon, while armed with a knife, threatened Vincent Mesa.
He was also accused of shouting and yelling while armed, threatening to cause further physical trouble to other customers.
Dissatisfied with the conviction and sentence, Kipyegon appealed.
He argued that the sentence was excessive and harsh for a first offender, adding that he had been under the influence of alcohol and had asked for forgiveness.
Kipyegon further submitted that it was not clear whether his conviction was based on the first or second count.
The state opposed the appeal and urged the court to uphold the custodial sentence. The respondent argued that the conviction was sound and the sentence appropriate, given the gravity of the offence.
The respondent further submitted that Kipyegon had clearly understood the charges when he voluntarily admitted to the facts before the magistrate and that the three-year sentence was lawful under the Penal Code, which provides for a maximum sentence of 10 years for the offence.
The High Court agreed, ruling that Kipyegon's guilty plea was unequivocal and that his three-year prison term was lenient.
Justice Julius Ng'arng'ar, in his judgment, found that the trial court had followed the proper procedure during the plea-taking process.
The court said the substance of the charges had been read and explained to Kipyegon in a language he understood.
“The appellant understood the charges and the facts and admitted them. He had every opportunity to inform the court the particulars of the charge or facts were not true but he did not," the judge observed.
The court also noted that Kipyegon was unrepresented, which heightened the court's duty to ensure the plea was unequivocal, but found no defect in the proceedings.
On the question of whether the plea could be overturned, the judge found that Kipyegon's mitigation did not negate any of the facts of the case.
Regarding the sentence, the court noted that the offence of threatening to kill carries a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment.
"The appellant was sentenced to three years imprisonment, which in my view was a lenient sentence compared to the maximum sentence of 10 years as provided for in the law above," Justice Ng'arng'ar stated.
"In the final analysis, it is my finding that the conviction of the appellant was proper and his sentence was fair."
The appeal was dismissed in its entirety.
