[2022] KEHC 1941 (KLR)
The court held that, following the Supreme Court's clarification in Francis Karioko Muruatetu v R [2021] eKLR, it is functus officio and therefore lacks jurisdiction to entertain or consider any application for resentencing where it has previously rendered a decision on the same matter. The only remedy available to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 1941 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Martin Nyongesa Wanyonyi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application 7 (E143) of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Resentencing
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- LK Kimaru
- Legal Topics
- Defilement Offence, Sentencing Jurisdiction, Sexual Offences Act, Functus Officio, Resentencing Applications
- 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
Martin Nyongesa Wanyonyi
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Resentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain an application for resentencing after it has already rendered a decision on the same matter.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the remainder of his custodial sentence commuted to a non-custodial sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that, following the Supreme Court's clarification in Francis Karioko Muruatetu v R [2021] eKLR, it is functus officio and therefore lacks jurisdiction to entertain or consider any application for resentencing where it has previously rendered a decision on the same matter. The only remedy available to the applicant is to pursue an appeal before the Court of Appeal. Consequently, the application for commutation of the remainder of the custodial sentence to a non-custodial sentence was dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for resentencing is dismissed.
- The file is ordered closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OFKENYA
INT EH HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE
MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 7 (E143 )OF 2021
MARTIN NYONGESA.................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
The Applicant, Martin Nyongesa Wanyonyi was convicted of the offence of defilementas prohibited by Section 8(1) as read with Section 8(3) of the Sexual Offences Act. The trial court found it as a fact that the prosecution had proved to the required standard of proof that the Applicant had on diverse dates between 14th October 2009 and 6th November 2009 unlawful had carnal knowledge of ZW a girl then aged twelve years . He was sentenced to serve twenty (20) years imprisonment on 22nd July 2010. His Appeal to the High court was found to be without merit and was dismissed.
It is not clear whether the Applicant preferred an appeal from the decision of this court to the Court of Appeal. What is without doubt is that the Applicant on 22nd January 2021 filed an application before this court seeking to have the reminder of the period that he is yet to serve commuted to a non-custodial sentence. The Applicant states that in the period of more than ten (10) years that he has been in lawful custody, he has undertaken various courses that will serve him well upon his release from prison. He attached several certificates as proof that he had completed various trades while serving his sentence. He also attached a recommendation letter from the Prison Authorities indicating that he has been a model prisoner.
This court has carefully considered the Applicant’s plea for reconsideration of his sentence. Unfortunately for the Applicant, since the clarification by the Supreme Court of the extent of the application of Francis Karioko Muruatetu Vs R [2021] eKLR,this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain or to consider any application for resentencing where the court had previously rendered its decision on the same. The functus officio rule now applies. The only remedy available to the Applicant (if he already has not done so) is to ventilate his appeal before the Court of Appeal.
In the premises therefore, the Application lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. File is ordered closed.
DATED AT KITALE THIS 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022.
L. KIMARU
JUDGE