[2021] KEHC 2212 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 2212 (KLR)

The court held that the petitioners' reliance on the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu to seek review of their sentences for robbery with violence was misplaced, as the Supreme Court had clarified that its decision on the unconstitutionality of mandatory sentences applied only to murder cases under section 204 of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 2212 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Oscar Lihanda; Appellant: Josephat Ashiundu; Appellant: Samwel Oyondi; Appellant: Charles Mzee; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Petition 35 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Petition / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/abuse of Process
Outcome
petition struck out as abuse of process
Judges
DN Musyoka
Legal Topics
Mandatory Sentencing, Robbery With Violence, Abuse of Process
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Mandatory Sentencing Robbery With Violence Abuse of Process

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oscar Lihanda

Appellant

Josephat Ashiundu

Appellant

Samwel Oyondi

Appellant

Charles Mzee

Appellant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Petition / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/abuse of Process

  1. 1 Whether the petitioners are entitled to sentence review for robbery with violence convictions based on the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu.
  2. 2 Whether the current petition is an abuse of court process due to the pendency of a similar earlier petition.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the petitioners' reliance on the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu to seek review of their sentences for robbery with violence was misplaced, as the Supreme Court had clarified that its decision on the unconstitutionality of mandatory sentences applied only to murder cases under section 204 of the Penal Code. Furthermore, the court found that the instant petition was an abuse of court process because an earlier petition based on the same facts and issues was already pending. Consequently, the court struck out the petition.

Court Disposition

petition struck out as abuse of process

Orders

  • The petition is struck out for being an abuse of court process.
  • The Deputy Registrar shall cause copies of this ruling to be availed to the petitioner and the office of Director of Public Prosecutions, Kakamega.