[2025] KEHC 3181 (KLR)
The High Court held that it is functus officio in respect of the applicant's conviction and sentence, as the matter had already been determined on appeal by a judge of the High Court, a court of equal status. Any challenge to that judgment can only be entertained by a superior court, namely the Court of Appeal....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 3181 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Peter Ndungu Matimo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application E048 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence
- Outcome
- application struck out
- Judges
- HI Ong'udi
- Legal Topics
- Defilement Offence, Sentence Review, Functus Officio, Jurisdiction of High Court
- 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
Peter Ndungu Matimo
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review a sentence already upheld on appeal by a court of equal status.
- 2 Whether the doctrine of functus officio applies to bar the present application.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court held that it is functus officio in respect of the applicant's conviction and sentence, as the matter had already been determined on appeal by a judge of the High Court, a court of equal status. Any challenge to that judgment can only be entertained by a superior court, namely the Court of Appeal. Therefore, the application for review of sentence was incompetent and the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain it.
Court Disposition
application struck out
Orders
- The application is struck out.
- The file is closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Matimo v Republic (Criminal Miscellaneous Application E048 of 2022) [2025] KEHC 3181 (KLR) (19 February 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 3181 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nakuru
Criminal Miscellaneous Application E048 of 2022
HI Ong'udi, J
February 19, 2025
Between
Peter Ndungu Matimo
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. Peter Ndungu Matimo the applicant was charged and convicted of the offence of defilement contrary to section 8(1) (2) (sic) of the Sexual Offences Act No. 3 of 2006. He was thereafter sentenced to life imprisonment.
2. The applicant filed Nakuru High Court Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2012. The same was heard and judgment delivered on 5th December, 2019 by Kiarie Waweru Kiarie J dismissing the appeal and upholding the conviction and the sentence.
3. The applicant has filed this undated application seeking a review of the sentence.
4. The application was opposed by the respondent’s counsel M/s E. Okok who cited the Supreme Court case of Joshua Gichuki. In response the applicant argued that he had withdrawn his appeal at the Court of Appeal on wrong advice, and wondered what to do next.
5. The appeal by the applicant was heard by a Judge of the High Court which is a court of equal status to this one. What the applicant is doing through this application is challenging Justice Kiarie’s Judgment. That can only be done by a senior court to this one which is the Court of Appeal. The upshot is that this court is functus officio and the application is therefore struck out and file closed.Orders accordingly
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED THIS 19THDAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 IN OPEN COURT AT NAKURU.H. I. ONG’UDIJUDGE