[2019] KEHC 2215 (KLR)
The court found that the issues raised by the petitioner were neither new nor compelling, as they had already been addressed during the trial and appeal. The petitioner could not have been arraigned without a report from the complainant, and the stolen items were indicated in the charge sheet. The appellate court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 2215 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Robin Obare Mweresa; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyamira
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 24 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Judgment
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Judges
- EM Muchoki
- Legal Topics
- Fresh Evidence, Retrial, Robbery With Violence, Sentence Review
- 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
Robin Obare Mweresa
Appellant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioner is entitled to a fresh trial on the basis of alleged new and compelling evidence.
- 2 Whether the grounds advanced by the petitioner meet the legal threshold for a retrial or review of sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the issues raised by the petitioner were neither new nor compelling, as they had already been addressed during the trial and appeal. The petitioner could not have been arraigned without a report from the complainant, and the stolen items were indicated in the charge sheet. The appellate court had already considered the evidence of identification and found it sufficient. The petitioner’s sentence had already been reviewed in line with the Supreme Court’s guidance. The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any new and compelling evidence to warrant a retrial or further review, and therefore dismissed the petition for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- The petition is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYAMIRA
PETITION NO. 24 OF 2019
ROBIN OBARE MWERESA..............................PETITIONER
-VRS-
THE REPUBLIC................................................RESPONDENT
JUDGEMENT
By the petition filed herein on 18th July 2019 the petitioner seeks what he has defined as “newly witness settlement after conviction”which at the hearing he explained was a fresh trial on new and compelling evidence. He submitted that the reason he was seeking a fresh trial was because the complainant in his case did not lodge any complaint and that the stolen goods were not mentioned in the first report. He explained that he was charged with robbery with violence and upon conviction was sentenced to death.
The petition was opposed. Learned Counsel for the prosecution submitted that the grounds advanced are not grounded on the law. He urged this court to dismiss the petition.
The petitioner did not file any relevant documents save the committal warrant and an order of Majanja J substituting the sentence of death with one for imprisonment for fifteen (15) years from the date the petitioner was sentenced by the lower court. I have nevertheless called for the file from which the order was made as well as the record of the lower court. It is clear from the said records that what the petitioner is raising is not new. Firstly, he could not have been arraigned without a report from the complainant and clearly what was stolen was indicated in the charge sheet. Majanja J heard his appeal as a Judge of this court albeit sitting in Kisii High Court. He considered the evidence of identification at length and came to the conclusion that the petitioner had been positively identified. At paragraph 17 of the judgement, Majanja J observed that the complainant told the police that he could identify one of his assailants and that he did so at an identification parade.
The issue raised by the petitioner concerning the first report is not new and neither is it compelling as it ought to have been raised in the appeal and no good reason is given for not having done so. Moreover, the petitioner’s sentence of death was substituted with one for imprisonment for a term of fifteen (15) years in line with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic [2017] eKLR. If the petitioner wanted another bite at the sentence or if he felt that sentence was harsh or excessive he ought to have appealed or sought review in the Court of Appeal as provided in Article 50 (2) (q) of the Constitution. His petition to this court lacks merit and it is dismissed.
Signed, dated and delivered in open court this 14th day of November 2019.
E. N. MAINA
JUDGE