[2019] KEHC 2380 (KLR)
The court found that the trial court misdirected itself by failing to consider the period the applicants had spent in custody prior to sentencing, as mandated by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court held that the applicants' sentence of fifteen years imprisonment should run from the date of their...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 2380 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Isaac Mbuva Mwanzia; Applicant: Gabriel Muthie Mbore; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application 23 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Computation
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- FN Muchemi
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Time Spent in Custody, Robbery With Violence, Criminal Procedure Code Section 333 2
- 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
Isaac Mbuva Mwanzia
Applicant
Gabriel Muthie Mbore
Applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Computation
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court failed to take into account the period the applicants spent in custody prior to sentencing as required by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the applicants' sentence should run from the date of arrest rather than the date of conviction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial court misdirected itself by failing to consider the period the applicants had spent in custody prior to sentencing, as mandated by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court held that the applicants' sentence of fifteen years imprisonment should run from the date of their arrest, 20th April 2009, rather than the date of conviction. This approach aligns with established legal principles and appellate authority, ensuring that the period spent in pre-sentence custody is properly credited against the sentence imposed.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The applicants' sentence of fifteen (15) years imprisonment shall run from the date of arrest, being 20th April 2009.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT EMBU
CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 23 OF 2019
ISAAC MBUVA MWANZIA.............................................................1ST APPLICANT
GABRIEL MUTHIE MBORE..........................................................2ND APPLICANT
VERSUS
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS.....................................RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
A. Introduction
1. This ruling pertains to the undated application filed on the 19th September 2019 in which the applicants seek orders that their sentence should run from the date of arrest as opposed to the date of conviction within the meaning of Section 333(2)and137(1) (20a) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
2. It is the applicants case that they have been in custody from the date of their arrest on the 20th April 2009 whereas the judgement was delivered on the 26th January 2018 and thus submit that the trial court ought to have taken into consideration the time they had spent in custody when passing their sentence. Reliance is placed in the case of Ahamed Abolfathi Mohammed & Another v Republic [2018] eKLR, Embu High Court Criminal Case No. 3 of 2014, Peter Maweu & Others and Nairobi High Court Criminal Cases 18 & 102 of 2018.
3. The prosecution is not opposed to the hearing on resentencing but urge the court to consider the circumstances under which the offence was committed.
B. Analysis of Law
4. The issue for determination before this court is whether there was a failure by the trial court failed to take into account in a meaningful way, the period that the appellants had spent in custody as required by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. That provision provides as follows:
“333(2) Subject to the provisions of section 38 of the Penal Code (Cap. 63) every sentence shall be deemed to commence from, and to include the whole of the day of, the date on which it was pronounced, except where otherwise provided in this Code.
Provided that where the person sentenced under subsection
(1) has, prior to such sentence, been held in custody, the sentence shall take account of the period spent in custody.”
5. The applicants were convicted and sentenced to fifteen (15) years imprisonment for the offence of robbery with violence on the 25/04/2011. It is not in dispute that the applicants were in custody from the 20/04/2009, when they were arrested. This is borne by the record of the trial court.
6. It is now trite law that prior to sentencing, a trial court should take into consideration the time the accused has been in custody. This was the holding of the Court of Appeal in the case ofAhamad Abolfathi Mohammed (supra). Section 333(2) is very clear on this issue.
7. It is my considered view that the court misdirected itself in that respect and ought to have ordered that the sentence of imprisonment do run from the date of their arrest on 20th April 2009.
8. In the circumstances, I allow this application and order that the applicants sentence of imprisonment of fifteen (15) years do run from the date of arrest being 20th April 2009.
9. It is hereby so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT EMBU THIS 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019.
F. MUCHEMI
JUDGE
In the presence of: -
Ms. Nandwa for State/Respondent
Both applicants present