[2024] KEHC 531 (KLR)
The court found that the trial judge, in sentencing the applicant to 25 years imprisonment for murder, expressly stated that the period spent in remand custody was taken into account. Therefore, the applicant had already received the benefit of Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code at the time of sentencing....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 531 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Daniel Kimanthi Kiio; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E073 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Consideration of Remand Period Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- A. Ong’injo
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Remand Custody, Murder Conviction, Section 333 2 Criminal Procedure Code
- 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
Daniel Kimanthi Kiio
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Consideration of Remand Period Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to further benefit of the period spent in remand custody prior to conviction under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the trial judge considered the remand period when passing sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial judge, in sentencing the applicant to 25 years imprisonment for murder, expressly stated that the period spent in remand custody was taken into account. Therefore, the applicant had already received the benefit of Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code at the time of sentencing. As a result, there was no basis for granting a further order for reduction of sentence on account of the remand period. The application was accordingly dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application seeking further reduction of sentence on account of remand period is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
Kiio v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E073 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 531 (KLR) (25 January 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 531 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Mombasa
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E073 of 2023
A. Ong’injo, J
January 25, 2024
Between
Daniel Kimanthi Kiio
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant was convicted for the offence of murder in High Court CR. Case No. 30 of 2010 and sentence to serve 25 years jail term. Applicant now seeks that an order be made that he is entitled to the benefit of the period spent in remand custody prior to conviction pursuant to Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
2. When passing sentence on 30th day of November 2016 the trial Judge Hon. M.J. Anyora Emukule - MBS- J said:-“In the circumstances, I would not sentence the accused to death, I would and hereby do sentence him to twenty-five (25) years in prison taking into account the years he spent in prison remand”.
3. This means that had the judge not factored in remand period he would have passed a sentence for a longer period than 25 years. Having expressly stated that remand period was considered, this application cannot be allowed. The same is dismissed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT/ONLINE THROUGH MS TEAMS, THIS 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024HON. LADY JUSTICE A. ONG’INJOJUDGEIn the presence of: -Etropia - Court AssistantMr. Ngiri for the RespondentApplicant present in personHON. LADY JUSTICE A. ONG’INJOJUDGE