[2019] KEHC 4678 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 4678 (KLR)

The court held that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muratetu & Another v. Republic and the Court of Appeal's decision in William Okungu v. Republic, the mandatory death penalty for robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code is unconstitutional. The sentence is now a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 4678 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Cyrus Nyamache Nyabuti; Applicant: Richard Achoki; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisii
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Constitutional Petition 10 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
petitioners resentenced to 15 years each from 14th October 2010
Legal Topics
Resentencing, Mandatory Death Penalty, Robbery With Violence, Supreme Court Precedent
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Resentencing Mandatory Death Penalty Robbery With Violence Supreme Court Precedent

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cyrus Nyamache Nyabuti

Applicant

Richard Achoki

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the mandatory death penalty for robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code is unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muratetu & Another v. Republic.
  2. 2 Whether the petitioners are entitled to resentencing following the declaration of unconstitutionality of the mandatory death penalty.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muratetu & Another v. Republic and the Court of Appeal's decision in William Okungu v. Republic, the mandatory death penalty for robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code is unconstitutional. The sentence is now a discretionary maximum, and the petitioners, having served about 8 years in custody, are entitled to resentencing. The court considered the circumstances of the case and the period already served, and resentenced each petitioner to 15 years' imprisonment from the date of first custody, 14th October 2010.

Court Disposition

petitioners resentenced to 15 years each from 14th October 2010

Orders

  • Each petitioner is sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment from 14th October 2010.