[2020] KEHC 3809 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 3809 (KLR)

The court found that the mandatory nature of the life sentence imposed on the applicant for robbery with violence was unconstitutional following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, which restored judicial discretion in sentencing. The court acknowledged the seriousness of the offence and the suffering caused...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 3809 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: David Kipkoech Kosgei; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 15 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Resentencing Application / Ruling on Resentencing After Conviction and Exhaustion of Appeals
Outcome
sentence reduced
Judges
RB Ngetich
Legal Topics
Resentencing, Mandatory Sentences, Robbery With Violence, Mitigating Factors, Rehabilitation, Constitutional Rights
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Resentencing Mandatory Sentences Robbery With Violence Mitigating Factors Rehabilitation Constitutional 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Kipkoech Kosgei

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Resentencing Application / Ruling on Resentencing After Conviction and Exhaustion of Appeals

  1. 1 Whether the mandatory life sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional following the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's sentence should be reduced in light of mitigating factors and time already served.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the mandatory nature of the life sentence imposed on the applicant for robbery with violence was unconstitutional following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, which restored judicial discretion in sentencing. The court acknowledged the seriousness of the offence and the suffering caused to the victims but also considered the applicant's demonstrated remorse, rehabilitation, acquisition of vocational skills, and the significant period already served in prison. Balancing these factors, the court exercised its discretion to reduce the applicant's sentence to a determinate term of 30 years' imprisonment, to run from the date of the original sentence.

Court Disposition

sentence reduced

Orders

  • Sentence is hereby reduced to 30 years’ imprisonment.
  • The sentence to run from the date the applicant was sentenced in the lower court.