[2023] KEHC 799 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 799 (KLR)

The court found that the sentence imposed on the applicant did not take into account the period he had already spent in custody prior to conviction, as required by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The judge reviewed the warrant of commitment and determined that the applicant was in custody for three...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 799 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Charles Owino Olongo; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Siaya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E010 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Sentence Review
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Sentence Review, Time Spent in Custody, Criminal Procedure Code Section 333 2
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentence Review Time Spent in Custody Criminal Procedure Code Section 333 2

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Owino Olongo

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Sentence Review

  1. 1 Whether the period spent in custody prior to sentencing should be considered in computing the applicant's sentence as per section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the sentence imposed on the applicant did not take into account the period he had already spent in custody prior to conviction, as required by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The judge reviewed the warrant of commitment and determined that the applicant was in custody for three months before sentencing. The court held that the twenty-year sentence should be calculated from the date of arrest, ensuring compliance with the statutory requirement to consider time already served. The application was therefore merited and allowed.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The twenty (20) years imprisonment imposed on the applicant shall be calculated from the date of his arrest on 9/7/2012.
  • File closed.