https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/9210
The court found that the trial court had already considered the applicant’s mitigation, remand custody, and first-offender status, and that the 5-year sentence was legal in the circumstances; therefore, no basis existed to revise the sentence.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 9210 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: CYNTHIA AKINYI AKODE; Respondent: REPUBLIC
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E089 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Sentence Review Application After Conviction and Sentencing
- Outcome
- Application dismissed for lack of merit.
- Judges
- ["DR Kavedza"]
- Legal Topics
- Revision of Sentence, Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs, Legal Sentence, First Offender Mitigation, Remand Custody
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
CYNTHIA AKINYI AKODE
Applicant
REPUBLIC
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Sentence Review Application After Conviction and Sentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there was good cause to revise the applicant’s sentence
- 2 Whether the 5-year sentence for trafficking in narcotic drugs was legal and उचित in the circumstances
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial court had already considered the applicant’s mitigation, remand custody, and first-offender status, and that the 5-year sentence was legal in the circumstances; therefore, no basis existed to revise the sentence.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed for lack of merit.
Orders
- Sentence review application dismissed.
- Orders accordingly.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KIBERA** **CRIMINAL REVISION NO. E089 OF 2026** CYNTHIA AKINYI AKODE……………………………………..APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC……………………………………………………….RESPONDENT **RULING.** 1. The applicant herein was charged and after a full trial convicted for the offence of Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs Contrary to Section 4 (a) (ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act No.4 of 1994 as amended by Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act 2022. She was sentenced to serve 5 years imprisonment. 2. The applicant filed the present application dated seeking sentence review. The grounds raised are that the sentence served is sufficient rehabilitation. She urged the court to release him. 3. I have considered the application, the grounds in support and the applicable law. From the record of the trial court, the court considered the applicant’s mitigation, the time spent in remand custody and the fact that the applicant was a first offender before sentencing. Having considered the application in its totality. The sentence imposed was also legal in the circumstances of the case. 4. In my view of the foregoing, I find no good cause or reason to revise the sentence imposed by the trial court. The application dismissed for lacking in merit. Orders accordingly. **Ruling dated and delivered virtually this 29th day of June 2026** **\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_** **D. KAVEDZA** **JUDGE**