[2020] KEHC 253 (KLR)
The High Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to revise its own sentence in a criminal matter where it was the trial court that convicted and sentenced the applicant. The Constitution provides that review of a criminal sentence must be conducted by a higher court as prescribed by law. Since the applicant...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 253 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Leah Wairimu Wanjie; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 120 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- NA Matheka
- Legal Topics
- Revision of Sentence, Murder Conviction, Jurisdiction of High Court, Mitigating Factors, Remorse and Rehabilitation
- 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
Leah Wairimu Wanjie
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to revise its own sentence in a criminal matter where the applicant seeks leniency based on mitigating factors.
- 2 Whether the application for revision of sentence should be entertained or dismissed given the constitutional and statutory framework.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to revise its own sentence in a criminal matter where it was the trial court that convicted and sentenced the applicant. The Constitution provides that review of a criminal sentence must be conducted by a higher court as prescribed by law. Since the applicant sought revision from the same court that imposed the sentence, the application was not tenable. The proper forum for such relief is the Court of Appeal. Consequently, the application was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revision of sentence is dismissed.
- The applicant is advised to seek relief from the appropriate higher court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NUMBER 120 OF 2019
LEAH WAIRIMU WANJIE............................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC...................................................................................................RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
1. The applicant LEAH WAIRIMU WANJIE has filed Notice of Motion on 24/7/2019 seeking orders; -
i. THAT, this Honorable court bee pleased to grant orders for revision of the imposed sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment in respect of HCCRC NO 16/2013 in the High Court Kenya at Nakuru based on mitigating factors of leniency.
ii. THAT, this application is supported by annexed affidavit of LEAH WAIRIMU WANJIE and upon such other grounds to be adduced during the hearing of this application.
iii. THAT, she wishes to attend the hearing of this application dated Nakuru on the 24th July 2019.
2. It is supported by her affidavit filed on the same date where she depones;
i. THAT she is the accused person in High Court at Nakuru Criminal case number 16 of 2013 charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with sec 204 of the Penal Code and was sentenced for 15 years.
ii. THAT she is remorseful and contrite to the offence she committed deeply regret and sincerely apologize to the honorable court and the victim’s family at large.
iii. THAT she has acquired vocational training and skills for the duration she have been in prison which will assist me once she is out of prison.
iv. THAT the factors despondent here above are true to the best of her knowledge and understanding.
3. During the hearing of the application she submitted that she was pleading for leniency. Seeking a review of her sentence in view of the fact that her time in prison has led to her reformation, having reflected on her offence, that she realizes that she was an angry person and is now remorseful, seeking forgiveness from both the family, her children and the court.
She also submitted that she has health problems, pleaded with this court to convert her custodial sentence to a non-custodial sentence so that she could go home and take care of her children.
That she had acquired skills which she would use outside to sustain herself.
4. In her response to the applicant’s submissions Ms. Wambui for state submitted that the applicant was charged with murder, was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment. That the state considered that sentence to be lenient, but sufficient in the circumstances of the case.
That the applicant had come to the wrong forum seeking orders she could only obtain from the Court of Appeal.
5. I sought a social inquiry report from Probation and After Care services which was filed by Ms. Kongani dated 29th July 2020.
6. The applicant was sentenced on 20/9/2018 and has been in prison for about 2 years.
7. The review she seeks is provided for under Article 50(20(q) of the Constitution. However, it clearly states; - by a higher court as prescribed by law.
8. Is this application tenable in the circumstances?
9. In view of the Constitutional provisions this is the same court that found her guilty, convicted and sentenced her, hence the orders she seeks cannot emanate from it.
10. The appropriate forum for her is the next court.
11. Application dismissed.
Delivered, dated and signed at Nakuru this 16th day of October 2020.
Mumbua T. Matheka
Judge
VIA ZOOM
In the presence of
Applicant: present
CA Edna
Ms. Wambui for state N/A