[2024] KEHC 5077 (KLR)
The High Court found that the trial court had duly considered the applicant's mitigation, including the time spent in remand custody and the fact that the applicant was a first offender. The trial court also called for and considered a pre-sentencing report before imposing sentence. The sentence of nine years'...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 5077 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: James Kiplimo Sitienei; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kibera
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 99 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DR Kavedza
- Legal Topics
- Defilement, Sentencing Principles, Pretrial Custody, Mitigation, Sexual Offences Act
- 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
James Kiplimo Sitienei
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court failed to consider the time spent in pretrial custody when sentencing the applicant.
- 2 Whether there is sufficient cause to revise the sentence imposed for the offence of defilement.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the trial court had duly considered the applicant's mitigation, including the time spent in remand custody and the fact that the applicant was a first offender. The trial court also called for and considered a pre-sentencing report before imposing sentence. The sentence of nine years' imprisonment for defilement was within the legal parameters set by the Sexual Offences Act and was not shown to be unlawful or manifestly excessive. There was no error or omission in the sentencing process that would justify revision. Accordingly, the application for revision was dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revision of sentence is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
Sitienei v Republic (Criminal Revision 99 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 5077 (KLR) (7 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 5077 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kibera
Criminal Revision 99 of 2024
DR Kavedza, J
May 7, 2024
Between
James Kiplimo Sitienei
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant was charged and convicted for the offence of defilement contrary to section 9 (1) (2) of the Sexual Offences Act No. 3 of 2006. He was sentenced to serve nine (9) years imprisonment. He has filed the present application seeking revision of sentence.
2. The grounds raised are that the court failed to consider the time spent in pretrial custody. Since his incarceration, he has reformed. He is remorseful and has rehabilitated.
3. I have considered the application, the grounds in support and the applicable law. From the record of the trial court, the court considered the applicant’s mitigation, the time spent in remand custody and the fact that the applicant was a first offender before sentencing. Having considered the application in its totality, I note that before sentencing, the trial court called for and considered the pre-sentencing report. The sentence imposed was also legal in the circumstances of the case.
4. In my view I find no good cause or reason to revise the sentence imposed by the trial court. The application dismissed.
RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 7TH DAY OF MAY 2024______________D. KAVEDZAJUDGE