[2024] KEHC 11203 (KLR)
The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide any evidence of the period spent in remand custody prior to his convictions and sentences. The court held that without such evidence, it could not consider the remand period in the computation of the sentence. The absence of material evidence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 11203 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Vincent Ochieng Otieno; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E140 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Remand Custody, Sexual Offences, Abduction
- 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
Vincent Ochieng Otieno
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period served in remand custody by the applicant should be considered in sentencing for the offences of abduction and rape.
Ratio Decidendi
The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide any evidence of the period spent in remand custody prior to his convictions and sentences. The court held that without such evidence, it could not consider the remand period in the computation of the sentence. The absence of material evidence rendered the application devoid of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
- File closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Otieno v Republic (Criminal Revision E140 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 11203 (KLR) (24 September 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 11203 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Criminal Revision E140 of 2024
RE Aburili, J
September 24, 2024
Between
Vincent Ochieng Otieno
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
(From the original conviction and sentence in Tamu Senior Principal Magistrate Criminal Case No. 224 of 2018)
Ruling
1. The Applicant Vincent Ochieng Otieno is a convict vide Tamu SPM Criminal Case No. 224 of 2018. He was sentenced to serve three (3) years imprisonment on 20th August 2018 for the offence of abduction.
2. In a different case before the same court, he was sentenced to serve 10 years’ imprisonment on 8th August 2018 for the offence of rape contrary to Section 3(1) of the Sexual Offences Act vide Sexual Offences Case No. 10 of 2018.
3. He now seeks that the period served in remand custody be considered.
4. I have considered the application. There is no evidence availed on the period spent in remand custody prior to the two convictions and sentences.
5. I find the application to be devoid of any material. It is dismissed. File closed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024R. E. ABURILIJUDGE