[2023] KEHC 2655 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 2655 (KLR)

The court found that the trial court had indeed considered the period the applicant spent in pre-trial remand custody when passing sentence. The sentencing notes showed that the applicant was in custody for over two years and that the trial court reduced the custodial sentence accordingly, ordering that he serve...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 2655 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Munyao Mang’Ao; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Revision E292 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
JM Bwonwong'a
Legal Topics
Sentencing Principles, Pre Trial Custody Credit, Revision Jurisdiction, House Breaking, Stealing, Concurrent Sentences
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentencing Principles Pre Trial Custody Credit Revision Jurisdiction House Breaking Stealing Concurrent Sentences

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Munyao Mang’Ao

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the trial court failed to consider the period spent in pre-trial remand custody when sentencing the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a reduction of sentence under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed was excessive or contrary to the law.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial court had indeed considered the period the applicant spent in pre-trial remand custody when passing sentence. The sentencing notes showed that the applicant was in custody for over two years and that the trial court reduced the custodial sentence accordingly, ordering that he serve only three years imprisonment after accounting for time already served. Therefore, the applicant's claim that the pre-trial custody period was not considered was unfounded. The application for revision of sentence was dismissed for lack of merit as the sentence imposed was lawful and proper.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for revision of sentence is dismissed for lack of merit.