[2021] KEHC 5423 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 5423 (KLR)

The court found that, in light of the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence for murder is unconstitutional and that sentencing should be individualized based on the circumstances of the offence and the offender. The applicant, having reported the offence himself, shown...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 5423 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Peter Kipruto Chesaina; Respondent: DPP
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application 328 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Resentencing Application Following Conviction and Sentence for Murder
Outcome
Death sentence set aside; substituted with fifteen years imprisonment from 13th December 2012.
Judges
NA Matheka
Legal Topics
Murder Sentencing, Resentencing Guidelines, Victim Impact Statement, Mitigation Factors
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Resentencing Guidelines Victim Impact Statement Mitigation Factors

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Kipruto Chesaina

Applicant

DPP

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Resentencing Application Following Conviction and Sentence for Murder

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to resentencing following the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu.
  2. 2 What is the appropriate sentence for the applicant considering the circumstances of the offence and mitigation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, in light of the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence for murder is unconstitutional and that sentencing should be individualized based on the circumstances of the offence and the offender. The applicant, having reported the offence himself, shown remorse, and not being from the area where the offence occurred, demonstrated factors warranting leniency. The court also considered the period spent in custody before sentencing and the lack of a victim impact statement due to the inability to trace the deceased's family. Consequently, the death sentence was set aside and substituted with a term of fifteen years imprisonment from...

Court Disposition

Death sentence set aside; substituted with fifteen years imprisonment from 13th December 2012.

Orders

  • Sentence of death is set aside.
  • Applicant to serve fifteen (15) years imprisonment from 13th December 2012.