[2020] KEHC 6833 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 6833 (KLR)

The court held that the principle in Muruatetu, which declared mandatory minimum sentences unconstitutional for depriving courts of sentencing discretion, does not apply to the petitioner.s case. The petitioner was convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment, which is below the maximum...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 6833 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Abdalla Kirao Wanje; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 49 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Resentencing Application Following Supreme Court Decision
Outcome
petition dismissed
Judges
DB Nyakundi
Legal Topics
Resentencing, Mandatory Sentences, Judicial Discretion, Fair Trial Rights
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Resentencing Mandatory Sentences Judicial Discretion Fair Trial Rights

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdalla Kirao Wanje

Appellant

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Resentencing Application Following Supreme Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the principle in Muruatetu apply to the petitioner.s sentence for attempted murder, which was not a mandatory minimum sentence?.
  2. 2 Was the sentence imposed by the trial court unconstitutional or excessive in light of the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu?.
  3. 3 Should the petitioner be resentenced considering his mitigation and the circumstances of the offence?.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the principle in Muruatetu, which declared mandatory minimum sentences unconstitutional for depriving courts of sentencing discretion, does not apply to the petitioner.s case. The petitioner was convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment, which is below the maximum sentence of life imprisonment prescribed by section 220 of the Penal Code. The trial court exercised its discretion in sentencing, considering the circumstances of the offence. The court found that the gravity and manner of the offence, including the planned and intentional attack with a spear and the intent to kill, justified the sentence imposed. As such, the sentence was not...

Court Disposition

petition dismissed

Orders

  • The petitioner.s application for resentencing is dismissed for want of merit.