[2024] KEHC 5432 (KLR)
The court found that the trial court failed to comply with Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code by not accounting for the period the applicant had already served in custody. The High Court held that this period must be considered and, accordingly, reviewed the sentence so that the three-year imprisonment...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 5432 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Jenes Otieno Ouma; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Case E112 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Case / Application for Review of Sentence and Conviction
- Outcome
- application allowed; sentence reviewed
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Review, Custodial Sentence, Credit for Time Served
- 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
Jenes Otieno Ouma
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Case / Application for Review of Sentence and Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period the applicant served in custody prior to sentencing should be accounted for in the final sentence.
- 2 Whether the trial court erred by not factoring in the period already served in custody.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial court failed to comply with Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code by not accounting for the period the applicant had already served in custody. The High Court held that this period must be considered and, accordingly, reviewed the sentence so that the three-year imprisonment term would run from the date the applicant was first arraigned in court, thereby ensuring compliance with the statutory requirement.
Court Disposition
application allowed; sentence reviewed
Orders
- The application dated 15/12/2023 is allowed.
- The applicant shall serve three years imprisonment as ordered by the trial court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
Ouma v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Case E112 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 5432 (KLR) (20 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 5432 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Siaya
Miscellaneous Criminal Case E112 of 2023
DO Ogembo, J
May 20, 2024
Between
Jenes Otieno Ouma
Appellant
and
Republic
Respondent
(Being an Application for review of sentence and Conviction in Siaya CM’s Court vide Criminal Misc. No. E433 of 2022 delivered by Hon. M. O. Wambani(CM) dated 3/5/2023)
Ruling
1. The accused/Applicant was charged with the offence of assault causing actual bodily harm contrary to Section 251 of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to serve three years imprisonment. He pleads that the period he served in custody be accounted for in his sentence. The prosecution has not made any submission on this application.
2. Section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code declares that such period served in custody be accounted for in the sentence. The trial court did not factor this in the sentence. It ought to have done so.
3. I allow this application dated 15/12/2023 and review the sentence of the Applicant. I order that he will serve three years imprisonment as ordered by the trial court. The sentence shall run from 15/12/2022, the date he was first arraigned in court. It is so ordered.
Dated, Signed and Delivered this 20th Day of May, 2024. D. O. OGEMBOJUDGE20/5/2024SIAYA HC CRIMINAL MISC. NO. 112 OF 2023 RULING 1 | Page