[2021] KEHC 9282 (KLR)
The court found that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional and courts have discretion to resentence. While the applicant made a case for resentencing, he failed to provide sufficient evidence of reformation....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 9282 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Daniel Munuve Munyithya; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitui
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 40 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Resentencing Application Following Supreme Court Decision
- Outcome
- Death sentence set aside; applicant resentenced to 18 years imprisonment with credit for time served; to serve 6 more years.
- Judges
- BB Limo
- Legal Topics
- Resentencing, Mandatory Sentences, Robbery With Violence, Judicial Discretion
- 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
Daniel Munuve Munyithya
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Resentencing Application Following Supreme Court Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to resentencing following the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu.
- 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient reformation to warrant a reduced sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional and courts have discretion to resentence. While the applicant made a case for resentencing, he failed to provide sufficient evidence of reformation. The court therefore set aside the death sentence and imposed a custodial sentence of 18 years, taking into account the period already served in custody and in prison. The applicant is to serve a further 6 years to allow adequate time for reformation and transformation before release.
Court Disposition
Death sentence set aside; applicant resentenced to 18 years imprisonment with credit for time served; to serve 6 more years.
Orders
- The death sentence imposed on 19th October 2011 is set aside.
- The applicant is sentenced to 18 years imprisonment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KITUI
MISC. APPLICATION NO. 40 OF 2019
DANIEL MUNUVE MUNYITHYA……………………………APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC…….…………………………….………………RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
1. Daniel Munuve Munyithya, the Petitioner herein was charged with the offence of Robbery with violence contrary to Section 296 (2) of the Penal Code vide Mwingi Senior Resident Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No.698 of 2009. He was convicted after trial and sentenced to serve death sentence. His subsequent appeals to the High Court and Court of Appeal bore no fruit and having exhausted all options open to him, he has now moved this court vide this petition for resentencing following the Supreme Court decision in the case of Francis Karioko Muruatetu.
2. The Petitioner states that he has been in jail now for 12 years since the time he was arraigned. He further alleges that he got involved with bad company and seeks leniency from this court.
3. It is true that following the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Francis Karioko Muruatetu [2017] Eklr, they mandatory nature of prescribed sentence is no longer binding to a trial court. A trial court has a discretion to hand out any other appropriate sentence as it deems fit.
4. The petitioner avers that he has reformed and he his remorseful. There are however no supporting documents to show the extent of his reformation and whether he had learnt skills that will endear him well with the society in order to avoid falling into the wrong company.
5. This court finds that while the petitioner has made a good case for resentencing, he has not clearly demonstrated that he has reformed well enough. I will therefore set aside the death sentence imposed by the lower court on 19th October 2011. In its place the petitioner/applicant is hereby sentenced to serve 18 years in prison. Since he has already spent 9 years in prison plus the 3 years he spent in custody while on trial, he shall now serve 6 year in jail to give him adequate time to reform and transform in order to be useful to the society once released.
Dated, SignedandDeliveredatKituithis19thdayof January, 2021.
R.K. Limo
JUDGE