[2023] KEHC 20562 (KLR)
The court found that, although the law prescribes the death penalty for murder, the Supreme Court in Muruatetu declared the mandatory nature of the death sentence unconstitutional, granting courts discretion in sentencing. The court considered the accused's status as a first offender, his age, the circumstances of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 20562 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: The Republic; Defendant: Vincent Momanyi Angasa
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisii
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 45 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Sentencing
- Outcome
- The accused was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for murder.
- Judges
- REA Ougo
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Sentencing Guidelines, Mitigation, Mandatory Sentences, Judicial Discretion
- 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
The Republic
Applicant
Vincent Momanyi Angasa
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Sentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused should be sentenced to a custodial or non-custodial sentence for the offence of murder.
- 2 Whether the mandatory death sentence for murder is constitutional in light of Supreme Court guidance.
- 3 What mitigating factors should influence the sentence imposed on the accused.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, although the law prescribes the death penalty for murder, the Supreme Court in Muruatetu declared the mandatory nature of the death sentence unconstitutional, granting courts discretion in sentencing. The court considered the accused's status as a first offender, his age, the circumstances of the offence, his remorse, and the period already spent in custody. However, given the gravity of the offence and the cruel manner in which the deceased lost her life, the court determined that a non-custodial sentence was not appropriate. The court exercised its discretion to impose a custodial sentence of 15 years imprisonment, balancing the mitigating factors against the...
Court Disposition
The accused was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for murder.
Orders
- The accused is sentenced to 15 years imprisonment.
- The accused has a right of appeal within 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Republic v Angasa (Criminal Case 45 of 2019) [2023] KEHC 20562 (KLR) (7 July 2023) (Sentence)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 20562 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisii
Criminal Case 45 of 2019
REA Ougo, J
July 7, 2023
Between
The Republic
Prosecution
and
Vincent Momanyi Angasa
Accused
Sentence
1. Vincent Momanyi Angasa was charged with the murder of Wilter Bosibori his wife. In a judgment dated March 17, 2023 I found him guilty and convicted him of the charge of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code.
2. The accused is a first offender. A pre-sentence report dated June 2, 2023 recommends a lenient custodial sentence for the sake of the children. He is 33 years old. The report indicates that he had a domestic issue with his wife. He is said to be remorseful and seek leniency. His family states that his children need him. The report does not indicate if the children were interviewed by the probation officer.
3. Counsel for the accused in mitigation pleaded with the court to give the accused a non-custodial sentence. She urged the court to note that the accused’s children are in the custody of a guardian and that the accused should be given a chance to look after his children.
4. I have considered the guidelines and objectives on sentencing, the fact that the accused is a 1st offender, the circumstances of the commission of the offence ,the age of the accused , his character of the accused. I have also considered the period he has spent in custody, about 3 years and half.
5. In petition No15 & !6 of 2015, Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another v Republic & others [2017 eKLR the Supreme Court stated as follows;(48)Section 204 of the Penal Code deprives the Court of the use of judicial discretion in a matter of life and death. Such law can only be regarded as harsh, unjust and unfair. The mandatory nature deprives the courts of their legitimate jurisdiction to exercise discretion not to impose the death sentence in appropriate cases. Where a court listens to mitigating circumstances but has, nonetheless, to impose a set sentence, the sentence imposed fails to conform to the tenets of fair trial that accrue to accused persons under articles 25 of the Constitution; an absolute right . . .(69)Consequently, we find that section 204 of the Penal Code is inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid to the extent that it provides for the mandatory death sentence for murder. For the avoidance of doubt, this decision does not outlaw the death penalty, which is still applicable as a discretionary maximum punishment . . .
6. Murder a serious offence and the sentence provided in law is a death penalty even though I recognize that this court has the discretion to give the accused a custodial or non-custodial sentence. 6. Considering the events which led to the death of deceased and that an innocent life was lost in a cruel manner, in my view the accused does not deserve a non-custodial. I sentence the accused person to 15 years imprisonment. He has a right of appeal within 14 days.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS THIS 7TH DAY OF JULY 2023. R. E. OUGOJUDGEIN THE PRESENCE OF:MR. AYODO- STATE COUNSEL - PRESENTMISS GOGI - ABSENTACCUSED VINCENT MOMANYI ANGASA – PRESENT.APHLINE – C/A