[2022] KEHC 10469 (KLR)
The High Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu (2017) as clarified in Muruatetu (2021) is only applicable to mandatory sentences in murder cases. Since the petitioner was convicted of robbery with violence, the High Court lacks jurisdiction and discretion to resentence him under the Muruatetu...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 10469 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Okeda; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Petition 58 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Petition / Ruling on Constitutional Application for Resentencing
- Outcome
- application struck out
- Judges
- WM Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Resentencing, Mandatory Sentences, Robbery With Violence, Jurisdiction of High Court
- 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
Joseph Okeda
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Petition / Ruling on Constitutional Application for Resentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu applies to mandatory sentences for robbery with violence.
- 2 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to resentence the petitioner under the cited Supreme Court authority.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu (2017) as clarified in Muruatetu (2021) is only applicable to mandatory sentences in murder cases. Since the petitioner was convicted of robbery with violence, the High Court lacks jurisdiction and discretion to resentence him under the Muruatetu framework. The application for resentencing is therefore incompetent and must be struck out.
Court Disposition
application struck out
Orders
- The constitutional application dated July 3, 2018 is struck out.
- Copies of the proceedings to be availed to Joseph Okeda and the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Okeda v Republic (Criminal Petition 58 of 2018) [2022] KEHC 10469 (KLR) (24 June 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 10469 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kakamega
Criminal Petition 58 of 2018
WM Musyoka, J
June 24, 2022
Between
Joseph Okeda
Petitioner
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The “constitution application,” dated 3rd July 2018, seeks a re-sentencing hearing on the basis of Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ & P, Mwilu DCJ &VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), where the court appeared to lay down a general principle that all mandatory sentences were unconstitutional, and to allow trial and appellate courts discretion to revisit cases where mandatory sentences had been imposed, with a view to revising or reviewing them.
2. The petitioner had been convicted of robbery with violence, contrary to section 296(2) of thePenal Code, Cap 63, Laws of Kenya, in a criminal case at the Kakamega Chief Magistrate’s court, whose details he does not disclose. He lodged an appeal at the High Court at Kakamega, being HCCRA No. 48 of 2010, which affirmed the conviction and confirmed the sentence.
3. The Supreme Court has clarified, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others (Amicus Curiae) [2021] eKLR (Koome CJ & P, Mwilu DCJ & VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Njoki, Lenaola & Ouko SCJJ), that its decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ & P, Mwilu DCJ &VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ) was of application only in murder cases, and not any other.
4. The offence that the petitioner was convicted of was robbery with violence, as defined in the Penal Code, Cap 63, Laws of Kenya. The decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ & P, Mwilu DCJ &VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ) is, therefore, of no application, and I have no discretion or jurisdiction to do that which the petitioner is inviting me to do.
5. The “constitution application,” dated July 3, 2018, is, therefore, incompetent, and I hereby strike it out. Let copies of these proceedings be availed to Joseph Okeda and to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAKAMEGA ON THIS 24THDAY OF June 2022WM MUSYOKAJUDGEErick Zalo, Court Assistant.Joseph Okeda, the petitioner, in person.Mr. Mwangi, instructed by the Director of Public Prosecutions, for the respondent.