[2023] KEHC 3153 (KLR)
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to resentence or further reduce the applicant's sentence because the applicant had already been resentenced by a court of competent, concurrent jurisdiction. The applicant's claim of being a juvenile at the time of sentencing was found to be unsubstantiated and a 'total...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 3153 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Fredrick Kizito; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E015 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Resentencing/reduction of Sentence
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Resentencing, Juvenile Offender Claim, Murder Conviction, Sentence Calculation
- 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
Fredrick Kizito
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Resentencing/reduction of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to resentence or further reduce the applicant's sentence after resentencing by a court of competent jurisdiction.
- 2 Whether the applicant was a juvenile (aged 17) at the time of sentencing and if that affects the sentence imposed.
- 3 Whether the period spent in custody during trial should be considered in sentence computation.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to resentence or further reduce the applicant's sentence because the applicant had already been resentenced by a court of competent, concurrent jurisdiction. The applicant's claim of being a juvenile at the time of sentencing was found to be unsubstantiated and a 'total lie.' The court also noted that the applicant had already benefited from the resentencing process, and the period spent in custody during trial had been ordered to be taken into account by a previous order. Accordingly, the application was found to be misplaced and was dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for resentencing or further reduction of sentence is dismissed.
- The file is hereby closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Kizito v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E015 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 3153 (KLR) (12 April 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 3153 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E015 of 2023
RE Aburili, J
April 12, 2023
Between
Fredrick Kizito
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Applicant herein Fredrick Kizito was convicted and sentenced to serve fifteen (15) years imprisonment for the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 of the Penal Code vice HCR No 50 of 2003 at Kisumu.
2. He now claims that he was aged 17 years when he was sentenced and that he is now reformed and trained in life’s skills as shown by the annexed certificates.
3. I have perused the documents annexed. Among them is a warrant of committal to prison dated March 10, 2006. The Petitioner was sentenced to death and vide Kisumu High Court Petition No 49 of 2019, he was resentenced to serve fifteen (15) years imprisonment.
4. The fifteen (15) years imprisonment was to run from June 18, 2019. The Applicant having been resentenced by the court of competent, concurrent jurisdiction, this court has no power to resentence or reduce the imposed sentence further.
5. Further, vide the order dated February 15, 2022, FA Ochieng J, (as he then was) stated as follows: -“It is ordered that when the prison authorities are calculating the period which the application is to spend when serving sentence, should take into account the three (3) years, six (6) months and 9 days which he spent in custody during trial.”
6. The Convict has already benefited from resentencing. I find this application misplaced and a total lie that he was aged 17 years old. It is hereby dismissed.
7. This file is hereby closed.
8. Orders accordingly.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023R. E. ABURILIJUDGE