[2023] KEHC 2291 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant, having been convicted of assault causing actual bodily harm and sentenced to two years imprisonment, did not merit a revision of sentence to a non-custodial term. The Pre-Sentence Report indicated that the applicant was a repeat offender with a history of violence and lack of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 2291 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Benard Ouma; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E138 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
- Outcome
- application for sentence revision dismissed; original sentence upheld
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Sentence Revision, Assault Causing Actual Bodily Harm, Recidivism, Pre Sentence Report, Custodial Sentence
- 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
Benard Ouma
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant's sentence of two years imprisonment for assault causing actual bodily harm should be revised to a non-custodial sentence.
- 2 Whether the applicant's criminal history and conduct justify a custodial sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant, having been convicted of assault causing actual bodily harm and sentenced to two years imprisonment, did not merit a revision of sentence to a non-custodial term. The Pre-Sentence Report indicated that the applicant was a repeat offender with a history of violence and lack of remorse, particularly towards his family, including the complainant who was his grandmother. The court emphasized the need for rehabilitation in prison due to the applicant's disruptive and violent behavior, as well as the risk he posed to his family if released. The court was not persuaded that the custodial sentence was excessive or unjustified and therefore declined to revise...
Court Disposition
application for sentence revision dismissed; original sentence upheld
Orders
- The request for sentence review is dismissed.
- The sentence of two years imprisonment is upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
Ouma v Republic (Criminal Revision E138 of 2022) [2023] KEHC 2291 (KLR) (23 March 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 2291 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Criminal Revision E138 of 2022
RE Aburili, J
March 23, 2023
Between
Benard Ouma
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
(From the original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No E0295 of 2022 in the Senior Principal Magistrate’s Court at Nyando delivered on 7th November 2022)
Ruling
1. The matter was before this Court on December 22, 2022 for sentence revision. However, as sentence review report was not available, the Hon Judge directed that the matter be revisited once the sentence Review Report is availed.
2. There is no evidence that a Sentence Review Report was filed.
3. I have however perused a Pre-Sentence Report filed by the Probation Officer, Nyando, Mr Nicholas Mirimo and dated November 7, 2022.
4. The convict in Nyando SPM’s Court Criminal Case No E295 of 2022 Benard Ouma Ondu was convicted of the offence of assault causing actual bodily harm and sentenced to serve two (2) years imprisonment.
5. According to the Pre-Sentence Report, the convict is a recidivist criminal in respect of many other offences namely, arson, assault, manufacturing changaa but that he was always released upon arrest. That he is a violent person, abusive to his immediate family members and extended family. The complainant was his grandmother and his caregiver and that he did not find it necessary to apologise to her for assaulting her.
6. It was recommended that if released, he will continue to harm his family hence a custodial sentence was preferred.
7. I have considered the recommendations by the Probation Officer and the alleged character of the convict. He has been in prison now close to five (5) months and he sought for sentence review on December 20, 2022 which was only one month after his conviction and sentence.
8. I am not persuaded that the convict deserves non-custodial sentence. There is need for him to be rehabilitated in prison and to reform before he can be released to his family which he has disrupted with violence due to drug abuse, according to the Probation Report dated November 7, 2022.
9. I decline to revise the sentence of two (2) years imprisonment imposed on the convict Benard Ouma Ondu and dismiss the request for Sentence Review.
10. This file is closed.
11. I so order.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2023R. E. ABURILIJUDGE