[2020] KEHC 1373 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 1373 (KLR)

The court found that the trial magistrate had expressly considered the period the applicant spent in remand custody during sentencing, as evidenced by the sentencing remarks and the disparity between the maximum statutory penalty (life imprisonment) and the 10-year sentence imposed. The court held that the applicant's mitigation regarding time spent in custody was duly taken into account, and therefore, there was no basis for revising the sentence under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The application for revision was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to serve the 10-year sentence from the date of sentencing, 20th September 2018.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 1373 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Ansoumana Conde; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
23 October 2020
Case Number
Criminal Miscellaneous Application 74 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing Revision, Remand Period Credit, Narcotic Offences, Mitigation, Statutory Interpretation
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Revision Remand Period Credit Narcotic Offences Mitigation Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ansoumana Conde

Applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing court failed to account for the period the applicant spent in remand custody prior to sentencing.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the remand period deducted from his sentence under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial magistrate had expressly considered the period the applicant spent in remand custody during sentencing, as evidenced by the sentencing remarks and the disparity between the maximum statutory penalty (life imprisonment) and the 10-year sentence imposed. The court held that the applicant's mitigation regarding time spent in custody was duly taken into account, and therefore, there was no basis for revising the sentence under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The application for revision was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to serve the 10-year sentence from the date of sentencing, 20th September 2018.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for revision is dismissed.
  • The applicant shall serve 10 years imprisonment as ordered by the trial court.