[2020] KEHC 6244 (KLR)
The court found no error or misdirection in the trial court's resentencing of the appellant to twenty years imprisonment for robbery with violence, especially considering that the maximum sentence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code is death. The trial court had already taken into account the appellant's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 6244 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Mutinda Muvevi Kavengo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Makueni
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 66 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed; sentence upheld
- Legal Topics
- Robbery With Violence, Sentencing Principles, Resentencing, Appeals Against Sentence
- 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
Mutinda Muvevi Kavengo
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of twenty (20) years imprisonment imposed on the appellant for robbery with violence should be reduced on appeal.
- 2 Whether there was any error or misdirection by the trial court in resentencing the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found no error or misdirection in the trial court's resentencing of the appellant to twenty years imprisonment for robbery with violence, especially considering that the maximum sentence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code is death. The trial court had already taken into account the appellant's mitigation and ordered the sentence to run from the date of arrest. The appellant's arguments for further reduction were based on personal transformation and rehabilitation, but did not demonstrate any legal or procedural error in the resentencing. The court held that the appeal was an abuse of process as the appellant had already exhausted his right of appeal on conviction and...
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed; sentence upheld
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The sentence of twenty (20) years imprisonment imposed on 11th December 2018 is upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MAKUENI
HCCRA NO. 66 OF 2019
MUTINDA MUVEVI KAVENGO.......APPELLANT
-VERSUS-
REPUBLIC.........................................RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the judgment of the Senior Resident Magistrate Hon. R. Koech dated 30/03/2016 in Makueni SRMCR No. 436 of 2014. )
JUDGMENT
1. Mutinda Muvevi Kavengothe Appellant herein was charged and convicted of the offence of robbery with violence contrary to section 296(2) Penal Code on 30th March 2016. He was on the same date sentenced to suffer death.
2. Not being satisfied with the outcome, he filed Machakos High Court Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2016. The same was heard by Justice D. Kemei and a judgment dismissing the entire appeal delivered on 3rd November, 2017.
3. He moved a step further vide Machakos High Court Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 157 of 2018 where the death sentence was quashed and order for resentencing made by Justice G. Odunga on 27th November, 2018.
4. The SPM Makueni Criminal Case No. 436/2014 file was remitted back to the SPM Makueni for compliance. The same was heard on 11th December, 2018 by Mr. J. Mwaniki SeniorPrincipal Magistrate, as a result of which the Appellant was sentenced to twenty (20) years imprisonment.
5. On 8th May 2019 he filed Makueni High Court Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 01 of 2019 seeking leave to file an appeal out of time. The same was filed and heard on 14th February 2020. The appeal is against the twenty (20) year sentence.
6. When the appeal came for hearing he made it clear that his appeal was ONLY against sentence. He submits that he is sixty (60) years and has transformed through his stay in prison. Filed in court by the Machakos prison in charge are two certificates namely:
i. Completion of discipleship training on growing and maturing in Christ.
ii. Completion of the prisoner’s journey.
7. He has asked this court to reduce his sentence of twenty (20) years to allow him go home. He has not pointed out any error made by the trial court in sentencing him to twenty (20) years imprisonment. The sentence allowed under section 296(2) Penal Code is death.
8. The sentence was reduced to twenty (20) years on 11th December, 2018 after the trial court took into account the mitigation by the Appellant. The learned trial Magistrate even made an order for the sentence to run from the Appellant’s date of arrest i.e. 3/6/2014.
9. If dissatisfied with the judgment in Machakos HCCRA No. 17 of 2016 the Appellant ought to have challenged it before the Court of Appeal. He instead chose to go round and round the issue of resentencing which I find to be an abuse of the court process.
10. I have not found on record anything to make me interfere with the sentence imposed, by way of resentencing on 11th December 2018.
11. I therefore dismiss the appeal and uphold the sentence.
Orders accordingly.
Delivered, signed & dated this 8th day of May 2020, in open court at Makueni.
………………………………….
H. I. Ong’udi
Judge