[2023] KEHC 3102 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 3102 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants' request for probation was without merit because the issue of time spent in custody had already been addressed during resentencing, as per Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court had previously exercised discretion by reducing the sentence from death to thirty...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 3102 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Akweywa Indeche; Applicant: Joshua Mboya Ashikanga; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E003 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Resentencing/probation
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Resentencing, Murder Conviction, Probation Application, Section 333 2 Criminal Procedure Code
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Resentencing Murder Conviction Probation Application Section 333 2 Criminal Procedure Code

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Akweywa Indeche

Applicant

Joshua Mboya Ashikanga

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Resentencing/probation

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to have the remainder of their sentence served on probation after resentencing for murder.
  2. 2 Whether the period spent in custody has already been considered under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' request for probation was without merit because the issue of time spent in custody had already been addressed during resentencing, as per Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court had previously exercised discretion by reducing the sentence from death to thirty years' imprisonment, taking into account all relevant factors. There was no new evidence or justification, such as testimonials or recommendations from prison authorities, to warrant further leniency or a non-custodial sentence. The application was deemed mischievous and dishonest, especially considering the gravity of the offence and the fact that the applicants had already...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for the remainder of the sentence to be served on probation is dismissed.
  • File closed.