[2020] KEHC 2920 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 2920 (KLR)

The court held that the trial magistrate erred by not factoring in the period the applicant spent in remand custody prior to sentencing. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Sentencing Policy Guidelines 2016 mandate that the time spent in custody must be considered and deducted from the total...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 2920 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Riziki Charo Mranja; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application 73 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Sentence Revision
Outcome
sentence reviewed to account for remand period
Judges
DB Nyakundi
Legal Topics
Sentence Revision, Remand Period Credit, Manslaughter, Sentencing Guidelines
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentence Revision Remand Period Credit Manslaughter Sentencing Guidelines

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

Parties

Riziki Charo Mranja

Applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Sentence Revision

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred by not considering the period spent in remand when sentencing the applicant for manslaughter.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the remand period deducted from his custodial sentence under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the trial magistrate erred by not factoring in the period the applicant spent in remand custody prior to sentencing. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Sentencing Policy Guidelines 2016 mandate that the time spent in custody must be considered and deducted from the total sentence. The applicant had been in remand for two years and three months before being sentenced to fifteen years for manslaughter. The court found that the applicant was entitled to have this period credited towards his sentence. Consequently, the sentence was reviewed to reflect that the period already served in remand would be included, and the remaining sentence would run from...

Court Disposition

sentence reviewed to account for remand period

Orders

  • The sentence is hereby reviewed to include the period the applicant already served in remand to remain with from 31.5.2013.