[2023] KEHC 20076 (KLR)
The court found that both the trial court and the High Court were silent on when the applicant's sentence would commence, despite the applicant having spent 11 months in remand custody prior to conviction. Applying section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court held that the period spent in remand must be...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 20076 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Fredrick Otieno Omondi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E051 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Computation Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Computation, Remand Period Credit, Section 333 2 Criminal Procedure Code
- 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
Fredrick Otieno Omondi
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Computation Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period of 11 months spent in remand custody by the applicant should be considered as part of his sentence under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the sentence should be ordered to run from the date the applicant was first arraigned in court.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that both the trial court and the High Court were silent on when the applicant's sentence would commence, despite the applicant having spent 11 months in remand custody prior to conviction. Applying section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court held that the period spent in remand must be considered as part of the sentence. The court therefore ordered that the applicant's sentence should run from March 9, 2017, being the date he was first arraigned in court, thereby crediting the remand period towards his 15-year sentence for manslaughter.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The sentence of the applicant shall run from March 9, 2017, the date the applicant was first arraigned in court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Omondi v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E051 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 20076 (KLR) (5 July 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 20076 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Siaya
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E051 of 2023
DO Ogembo, J
July 5, 2023
Between
Fredrick Otieno Omondi
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. Vide a Notice of Motion Application dated March 21, 2023, the applicant Fredrick Otieno Omondi, seeks that the period of 11 month that he spent in remand custody awaiting be considered as part of his sentence. The application has been brought under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. He has deponed that the High court had ordered that his sentence do run from the date of conviction. The appellant relied on the case of Ahmed Abolifathi Mohammed & 6 Others -vs- Republic [2018] eKLR.
2. The Prosecution’s submissions were that court do consider the record of proceedings to make a ruling on this application.
3. I have considered the cited provision of the law. The proviso to section 333(2) of theCriminal Procedure Codedeclares that such period that an accused person spends in remand custody awaiting determination of their case ought to be accounted for in the sentence.
4. The record of proceedings herein show that the applicant was first charged with the offence of Manslaughter contrary to section 203 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code, for which he was convicted and sentenced to serve 15 years imprisonment. His appeal against the conviction and sentence was dismissed on 25/5/2020. Both the trial court and the High Court were however silent on when the sentence of the appellant would start running. The sentence of the applicant ought to have been ordered to run as to account for the period he had remained in remand custody awaiting trial.
5. I accordingly therefore find merit in the application of the applicant dated March 21, 2023. I allow the same and order that the sentence of the applicant do run from March 9, 2017, the date the applicant was first arraigned in court. It is so ordered.
D. O. OGEMBOJUDGE5TH JULY, 2023Court:Ruling read out in Open court in presence of the Applicant and Ms Mumu for the State.D. O. OGEMBOJUDGE5THJULY, 2023