[2024] KEHC 5306 (KLR)
The court found that while the applicant's request for sentence review lacked merit on the grounds advanced, recent jurisprudence from the Court of Appeal (Manyeso v R) established that indeterminate life sentences are unconstitutional as they amount to inhumane and degrading treatment. Applying this principle, the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 5306 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Morris Mbugua Mutungi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Case E009 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Case / Sentence Review Ruling
- Outcome
- sentence_varied
- Judges
- SM Mohochi
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Review, Robbery With Violence, Life Imprisonment, Constitutional Rights, Revision Jurisdiction
- 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
Morris Mbugua Mutungi
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Case / Sentence Review Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review the sentence imposed on the applicant for the offence of robbery with violence.
- 2 Whether the sentence of 30 years imprisonment imposed by the High Court was harsh and excessive.
- 3 Whether recent jurisprudence on indeterminate life sentences applies to the applicant's case.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that while the applicant's request for sentence review lacked merit on the grounds advanced, recent jurisprudence from the Court of Appeal (Manyeso v R) established that indeterminate life sentences are unconstitutional as they amount to inhumane and degrading treatment. Applying this principle, the court exercised its revisionary jurisdiction to substitute the life sentence with a determinate term of imprisonment. The court determined that a sentence of thirty-two (32) years imprisonment, running from the date of conviction (10th September 2012), was appropriate in the circumstances, thereby aligning the sentence with constitutional standards and recent appellate authority.
Court Disposition
sentence_varied
Orders
- The life sentence previously imposed is set aside and substituted with a sentence of thirty-two (32) years imprisonment.
- The sentence shall run from 10th September 2012.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Mutungi v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Case E009 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 5306 (KLR) (15 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 5306 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Eldoret
Miscellaneous Criminal Case E009 of 2023
SM Mohochi, J
May 15, 2024
Between
Morris Mbugua Mutungi
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Applicant was charged, convicted and sentence to life imprisonment by C.M.’ Court Nakuru for the offence of Robbery with Violence contrary to Section 296 (2) of the Penal Code in Criminal Case Number 3101 of 2012.
2. That the sentence of life imprisonment was reduced to 30 years vide High Court Criminal Appeal umber 11 of 2020.
3. That he never appealed to the Court of Appeal at Nakuru hence seeks for a sentence review of the sentence awarded by the High Court that he finds it so harsh and excessive.
4. That this Court has jurisdiction to determine this application under the provisions of Article 165 (3) of the new constitution of Kenya 2010.
5. Having considered the application, the applicants written submissions, the Applicant’s Appeal and Judgment in HCRA of 2020, the Trial Court proceedings, Judgment and Sentence CMCR. No. 3101 of 2012, I am persuaded that the Applicant entire application has no basis and the same fails.
6. However, this Court has an obligation to be the protector of human rights and in the discharge of the revision jurisdiction, recalling the recent Court of Appeal decision Manyeso v R HCRA No.12 of 2021: -“That an indeterminate life sentence was inhumane treatment and in contravention to article 28 of the constitution that this form of punishment is degrading and inhuman.”
7. Thus the Court of Appeal substituted life imprisonment with a forty (40) year imprisonment sentence.
8. In this particular instance this Court on the holdings in the (Manyeso decision) disturb the life sentence imposed and substitute the same with a thirty (32) years imprisonment sentence.
9. The sentence shall run from the 10th September 2012. It is so ordered.
SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU ON THIS 15TH DAY OF MAY 2024. ....................................................MOHOCHI S.MJUDGEIn the Presence of;Ms. Schola, C.AApplicantMs. Jackie Kisoo, Prosecution Counsel for the Republic