[2022] KEHC 13911 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 13911 (KLR)

The court found that the offences in question were committed at different times, involved different complainants, and arose from separate transactions. As such, the sentences imposed by the trial courts should not run concurrently. The Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines provide that concurrent sentences are...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 13911 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Ismael Ben Otieno Ouma; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Revision E376 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Concurrent Sentences
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
LN Mutende
Legal Topics
Sentencing Principles, Concurrent Sentences, Revision Jurisdiction, Stealing Offences
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentencing Principles Concurrent Sentences Revision Jurisdiction Stealing Offences

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ismael Ben Otieno Ouma

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Concurrent Sentences

  1. 1 Whether the sentences imposed in Criminal Cases No E597 of 2021 and E630 of 2021 should run concurrently from May 31, 2021.
  2. 2 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to revise the trial court's sentencing orders in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the offences in question were committed at different times, involved different complainants, and arose from separate transactions. As such, the sentences imposed by the trial courts should not run concurrently. The Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines provide that concurrent sentences are appropriate only where offences arise from a single transaction, whereas consecutive sentences are warranted for offences committed in multiple transactions involving multiple victims. The High Court's revisionary jurisdiction does not extend to altering sentences that are lawful and proper in the circumstances. Therefore, the application for concurrent running of sentences lacked...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for the sentences to run concurrently is dismissed.