[2022] KEHC 2925 (KLR)
The High Court determined that the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR, as clarified in the subsequent 2021 directions, applies exclusively to mandatory sentences for murder under section 204 of the Penal Code. Since the applicant was convicted of robbery with...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2925 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Emmanuel Shisiebo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E024 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
- Outcome
- application and petition dismissed for want of jurisdiction
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Mandatory Sentencing, Robbery With Violence, Jurisdiction of High Court
- 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
Emmanuel Shisiebo
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR applies to mandatory sentences for robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code.
- 2 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review the applicant's sentence for robbery with violence in light of the Supreme Court's directions.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court determined that the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR, as clarified in the subsequent 2021 directions, applies exclusively to mandatory sentences for murder under section 204 of the Penal Code. Since the applicant was convicted of robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code, the Muruatetu decision does not extend to his case. Consequently, the High Court lacks jurisdiction to review or alter the sentence imposed by the trial court for robbery with violence. The application and petition for sentence review are therefore incompetent and must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
application and petition dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Orders
- The application and petition for review of sentence are dismissed as incompetent.
- The Deputy Registrar shall cause copies of this ruling to be availed to the petitioner and the office of Director of Public Prosecutions, Kakamega.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. E024 OF 2021
EMMANUEL SHISIEBO.....................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC.........................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This matter was placed before me for the purpose of giving directions, in view of the recent decision by the Supreme Court in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others(Amicus Curiae[2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ), with respect to mandatory sentences, where it was clarified that the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), had arisen from proceedings relating to murder, under section 204 of the Penal Code, Cap 63, Laws of Kenya, and the position stated in the said decision was intended to apply only to mandatory sentences with respect to murder cases.
2. The petition herein, undated, was filed herein on 12th October 2021, and the undated chamber summons filed herein simultaneously with it, are principally founded on the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), for the applicant seeks review of his sentence, where he had been convicted of robbery with violence, contrary to section 296(2) of the Penal Code, in Kakamega CMCRCRC No. 255 of 2011, and was sentenced to death, later commuted to life imprisonment by the President of the Republic. He avers that he has exhausted his appeals, without disclosing details.
3. The offence, the subject of the instant proceedings, is not murder, but robbery with violence, as defined in Section 296(2) of the Penal Code, the decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), therefore, does not apply to it. As a consequence, the High Court has no jurisdiction to review the sentence that was imposed by the trial court, in view of the directions given in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others(Amicus Curiae[2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ). The application and petition are incompetent.
4. The Deputy Registrar shall cause copies of this ruling to be availed to the petitioner and the office of Director of Public Prosecutions, Kakamega.
PREPARED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAKAMEGA THIS 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
W MUSYOKA
JUDGE