[2021] KEHC 1048 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 1048 (KLR)

The court held that following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence for murder is unconstitutional and the petitioner is entitled to resentencing. In exercising this discretion, the court considered the period already served in custody, the lack of evidence of rehabilitation, and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 1048 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Philip Muriuki Ambao; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Petition E011 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Petition / Resentencing After Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Petition for resentencing allowed; death sentence set aside and substituted with fifteen years' imprisonment from date of conviction.
Judges
TW Cherere
Legal Topics
Murder Sentencing, Resentencing Jurisprudence, Mandatory Death Penalty, Remorse and Rehabilitation
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Resentencing Jurisprudence Mandatory Death Penalty Remorse and Rehabilitation

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philip Muriuki Ambao

Appellant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Petition / Resentencing After Appeal Dismissed

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner is entitled to resentencing following the Supreme Court decision declaring the mandatory death sentence unconstitutional.
  2. 2 Whether the period already served in custody should be considered in determining the appropriate sentence.
  3. 3 Whether the petitioner's remorse and lack of evidence of reformation should affect the sentence imposed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence for murder is unconstitutional and the petitioner is entitled to resentencing. In exercising this discretion, the court considered the period already served in custody, the lack of evidence of rehabilitation, and the petitioner's expression of remorse. The court found that a sentence of fifteen years' imprisonment from the date of conviction was appropriate, balancing the gravity of the offence with the need for rehabilitation and the time already served.

Court Disposition

Petition for resentencing allowed; death sentence set aside and substituted with fifteen years' imprisonment from date of conviction.

Orders

  • The petitioner is resentenced to fifteen (15) years' imprisonment from 07th June, 2012.
  • The period already served in custody shall be taken into account.