[2025] KEHC 8495 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 8495 (KLR)

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to resentence the applicant or to apply section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code after the Court of Appeal has substituted the original sentence. The Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines specify that only the court which last imposed the sentence—in this case, the Court of Appeal—has jurisdiction to entertain a resentencing application. The doctrine of functus officio precludes the High Court from reopening or reviewing a sentence imposed by a superior court. Therefore, the applicant's request for resentencing must be directed to the Court of Appeal, not the High Court.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 8495 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Daniel Otieno Ochieng alias Dan; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
13 June 2025
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application E126 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Resentencing Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
Outcome
application dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Judges
A Mabeya
Legal Topics
Resentencing, Jurisdiction of High Court, Sentence Computation, Time Spent in Custody
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Resentencing Jurisdiction of High Court Sentence Computation Time Spent in Custody

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Otieno Ochieng alias Dan

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Resentencing Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to resentence the applicant after the Court of Appeal substituted the death sentence with a term of imprisonment.
  2. 2 Whether section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code applies to the applicant's sentence after appellate review.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to resentence the applicant or to apply section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code after the Court of Appeal has substituted the original sentence. The Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines specify that only the court which last imposed the sentence—in this case, the Court of Appeal—has jurisdiction to entertain a resentencing application. The doctrine of functus officio precludes the High Court from reopening or reviewing a sentence imposed by a superior court. Therefore, the applicant's request for resentencing must be directed to the Court of Appeal, not the High Court.

Court Disposition

application dismissed for want of jurisdiction

Orders

  • The applicant's prayer for resentencing is declined.
  • The applicant may seek resentencing before the Court of Appeal if so advised.