[2024] KEHC 1023 (KLR)
The court found that the trial magistrate did not expressly consider the period the applicant spent in custody prior to sentencing, as required by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant was in custody for 4 months and 24 days, and both the applicant and the State agreed that this period should...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 1023 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Daniel Musyoka; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Voi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E016 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
- Outcome
- application allowed; sentence reviewed and reduced
- Judges
- GMA Dulu
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Review, Pre Sentence Custody, Sentence Reduction, Criminal Procedure Code Section 333 2
- 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
Daniel Musyoka
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court erred by failing to consider the period the applicant spent in custody before sentencing.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a reduction of sentence under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial magistrate did not expressly consider the period the applicant spent in custody prior to sentencing, as required by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant was in custody for 4 months and 24 days, and both the applicant and the State agreed that this period should be deducted from the sentence. The High Court, therefore, allowed the application for revision and reduced the prison sentence by the period spent in custody, ensuring compliance with statutory and case law requirements.
Court Disposition
application allowed; sentence reviewed and reduced
Orders
- The prison sentence imposed on the applicant is reduced by four (4) months and twenty four (24) days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Musyoka v Republic (Criminal Revision E016 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 1023 (KLR) (7 February 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 1023 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Voi
Criminal Revision E016 of 2023
GMA Dulu, J
February 7, 2024
Between
Daniel Musyoka
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. In this is matter, the applicant has asked for review of sentence citing section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap.75).
2. He has relied on several decided cases, including the case of Ahamad Abolfathi Mohammed & Another =Versus= Republic(2018) eKLR in which the Court of Appeal stated that the period wherein an accused person is held in custody before sentence, should to be taken into account by the trial court in sentencing.
3. On his part, the Prosecuting Counsel Mr. Sirima, has submitted that the applicant was in custody for 4 months and 24 days during trial, and that the State has no objection to that period being reduced from the prison sentence imposed.
4. I have perused the proceedings of the trial court. During sentencing, the trial Magistrate stated that the court had considered the mitigation of the accused herein (applicant), and that he was a first offender. The court however, did not mention the fact that the accused person had spent time in custody during trial, thus it cannot be said that the court considered that fact in sentencing.
5. I note that the accused person (applicant) was charged in July 2022 and sentenced in December 2022, which was the period highlighted by the Director of Public Prosecutions.
6. In those circumstances therefore, I allow the application herein and review the sentence imposed. I reduce the prison sentence herein by four (4) months and twenty four (24) days. It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED THIS 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 AT VOI IN OPEN COURT.GEORGE DULUJUDGEIn the presence of:-Alfred/Trizah – Court AssistantApplicantMr. Sirima for State