[2024] KEHC 7368 (KLR)
The application was dismissed because the applicant had already benefited from a resentencing by a competent judge, who reduced his sentence from 30 years to 10 years' imprisonment, which was below the statutory minimum. The applicant failed to present any new material or demonstrate any error apparent on the face...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 7368 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Erick Odhiambo Ojwang; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E057 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application to Consider Pre Sentence Custody Period
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Defilement, Sentencing Review, Pre Sentence Custody, Sexual Offences Act
- 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
Erick Odhiambo Ojwang
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application to Consider Pre Sentence Custody Period
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should consider the one year the applicant spent in custody prior to sentencing when the applicant was already resentenced by a superior court.
- 2 Whether there is any error apparent on the face of the judgment of 28th November 2019 or sufficient cause to interfere with the discretion exercised by the previous judge.
Ratio Decidendi
The application was dismissed because the applicant had already benefited from a resentencing by a competent judge, who reduced his sentence from 30 years to 10 years' imprisonment, which was below the statutory minimum. The applicant failed to present any new material or demonstrate any error apparent on the face of the previous judgment or sufficient cause to warrant interference with the earlier exercise of judicial discretion. The High Court held it had no jurisdiction to review or alter the previous judgment in the absence of such grounds, and the application was found to be without merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application filed on 5th October 2023 is dismissed.
- This file is closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Ojwang v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E057 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 7368 (KLR) (11 June 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 7368 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E057 of 2023
RE Aburili, J
June 11, 2024
Between
Erick Odhiambo Ojwang
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
(From the original conviction and sentence in the Senior Principal Magistrate’s Court Criminal Sexual Offences Case No. 23 of 2017 at Winam)
Ruling
1. This file has been pending in the system since 10th May 2023 without any action. It was trampled upon during case audit.
2. I have considered this application that the court considers the one year that the applicant spent in custody prior to being sentenced to serve 30 years’ imprisonment on 31st October 2018.
3. I have also perused the Judgment in HCCRA No. 101 of 2018 wherein the Appellant’s appeal against conviction for defilement contrary to Section 8(1) as read with Section 8(3) of the Sexual Offences Act was dismissed but his appeal against sentence of 30 years in prison was allowed by T. W. Cherere J on 28th November 2019.
4. I observe that in the said judgment, the learned Judge exercised discretion and set aside the 30 years’ imprisonment imposed and substituted it with 10 years’ imprisonment from 31st October 2018 when the Appellant was sentenced.
5. The learned Judge having made that decision must have been guided by the facts placed before her. This court cannot review Judgment rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction which, in fact, was extremely lenient by resentencing the Appellant to half of the mandatory minimum sentence provided for under Section 8(3) of the Sexual Offences Act
6. The Applicant has not placed before this court any material to persuade it that there is any error apparent on the face of that judgment of 28th November 2019 or that there is sufficient cause to interfere with the discretion exercised judiciously by the Learned Judge, that Judgment being the only document placed before this court for consideration.
7. I find the application filed on 5th October 2023 to be devoid of any substance and merit. It is hereby dismissed.
8. This file is closed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024R. E. ABURILIJUDGE