[2022] KEHC 1260 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 1260 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had already benefitted from a resentencing exercise in which the mandatory minimum sentence was reduced from 20 years to 15 years imprisonment, with the sentence expressly ordered to run from the date of the original sentencing in the lower court. The court held that this...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 1260 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Evans Ouma Oketch; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Siaya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E034 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Reduction Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Sentencing Principles, Remand Custody Credit, Application of Section 333 2 Cpc, Resentencing, Defilement Offences
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentencing Principles Remand Custody Credit Application of Section 333 2 Cpc Resentencing Defilement Offences

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evans Ouma Oketch

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Reduction Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to further reduction of sentence by application of Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to account for time spent in remand custody.
  2. 2 Whether the resentencing already considered the period spent in remand custody.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had already benefitted from a resentencing exercise in which the mandatory minimum sentence was reduced from 20 years to 15 years imprisonment, with the sentence expressly ordered to run from the date of the original sentencing in the lower court. The court held that this resentencing had already taken into account the period spent in remand custody as required by Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Consequently, there was no merit in the applicant's request for a further reduction of sentence, and the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for further reduction of sentence is dismissed.
  • File closed.