[2018] KEHC 78 (KLR)
The court held that its powers of revision under section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code are confined to examining the correctness, legality, or propriety of findings, sentences, or orders of subordinate courts. Since the applicant's sentence had already been affirmed by the High Court on appeal, the court found...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 78 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Alekana Manabe; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 01 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Review / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sentence Review, Revision Jurisdiction, Robbery Offences
- 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
Joseph Alekana Manabe
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review or revise a sentence already affirmed on appeal.
- 2 Whether the grounds advanced by the applicant justify interference with the sentence imposed and affirmed on appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that its powers of revision under section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code are confined to examining the correctness, legality, or propriety of findings, sentences, or orders of subordinate courts. Since the applicant's sentence had already been affirmed by the High Court on appeal, the court found that there was nothing illegal or improper about the sentence. The review sought by the applicant did not fall within the court's mandate under section 362, and the grounds advanced—rehabilitation, partial sentence served, and medical condition—did not provide a legal basis for review or revision. Accordingly, the application was dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for review of sentence is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KAKAMEGA
REVIEW NO. 01 OF 2018
JOSEPH ALEKANA MANABE..............................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC..............................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The applicant herein was convicted of the offence of robbery contrary to section 296 (1) of the Penal Code and sentenced to serve 7 years imprisonment. He appealed against the conviction and the sentence before the High Court but the appeal was unsuccessful. He has now filed for a review of the sentence before this court. The grounds of review are that:
(1) The applicant has already served more than a third of the sentence imposed on him.
(2) The applicant while in custody has undergone vocational training attaining grades 1,ll and lll in carpentryand further earning a diploma in theology and othercertificates.
(3) The appellant is a known patient of peptic ulcers.
2. The grounds under which this court may review or revise the record of a lower court are set out in section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code that states that:-
“ The High Court may call for and examine the record of any criminal proceedings before any subordinate court for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed ,and as to the regularity of any proceedings of any such subordinate court .”
3. Revision under the said section is confined to the “correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed …” The review of the sentence that the applicant is seeking with this court does not fall among any of these. The sentence imposed on the applicant was affirmed by the judge who heard his appeal. The correctness and propriety of the sentence was considered during the appeal. There is thereby nothing illegal about the sentence. This court cannot interfere with a sentence that has been affirmed by an appeal court. The review or otherwise of the sentence falls outside the mandate of this court.
In the foregoing the application has no merits and is accordingly dismissed.
Delivered, dated and signed at Kakamega this 18th day of July, 2018
J.NJAGI
JUDGE
In the presence of :
Appellant ..........................................................
...............................................State/Respondent
....................................................Court assistant