[2020] KEHC 3786 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant committed the second offence of assault while already serving a sentence for defilement. The offences were not related in time or circumstance. The court held that allowing the sentences to run concurrently would undermine the objectives of sentencing, particularly deterrence and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 3786 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Victor Kiprono Menjo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kericho
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application 16 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Concurrent Sentencing
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- AN Ongeri
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Policy, Concurrent Sentences, Consecutive Sentences, Sexual Offences, Assault in Prison
- 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
Victor Kiprono Menjo
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Concurrent Sentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to have sentences from two separate convictions run concurrently.
- 2 Whether offences committed at different times and under different circumstances should attract concurrent or consecutive sentences.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant committed the second offence of assault while already serving a sentence for defilement. The offences were not related in time or circumstance. The court held that allowing the sentences to run concurrently would undermine the objectives of sentencing, particularly deterrence and rehabilitation. The only way to deter the applicant from further criminal conduct while in custody is to have the sentences run consecutively. The application for concurrent sentencing was therefore rejected, and the applicant was ordered to serve the 15-year sentence first, followed by the 6-month sentence.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for concurrent sentencing is rejected.
- The applicant shall first serve the 15 years imprisonment and then 6 months imprisonment for the offence committed while in prison.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KERICHO
MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.16 OF 2019
VICTOR KIPRONO MENJO.......................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC...............................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Applicant herein VICTOR KIPRONO MENJO filed this Misc. Criminal Application No.16 of 2020 seeking the following orders:
i) THAT the Application be certified urgent and be heard on priority basis.
ii) THAT the court be pleased to order that the sentence imposed by the CM’s Court Kericho on 12/7/2019 in Criminal Case No.4538 of 2016 to run concurrently with the 15 years sentence in Eldama Ravine Criminal Case No.112 of 2011.
2. The Application is supported by the affidavit of the applicant filed in court on 6/12/2019 in which he has deposed that he was convicted in Eldama Ravine PMCC No.112/2011 with Defilement contrary to section 8(1) as read with section 8(4) of the Sexual Offences Act (SOA) and he was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment.
3. The Applicant stated that while in prison, he committed another offence of assault and was subsequently charged in Kericho CMCC No.4538 of 2016 and he was again sentenced to 6 months imprisonment.
4. The Applicant is now seeking for orders that the two sentences run concurrently. The Application was opposed by the Respondent for reasons that the two offences are not related.
5. I find that the Applicant committed the second offence while in prison. The two offences are not related and his application to have the sentence to run concurrently is rejected.
6. The Applicant is expected to reform and not to continue committing other crimes while in custody and the only way to deter him is to have the two sentences run consecutively.
7. The 2016 Judiciary of Kenya Sentencing Policy Guidelines lists the objectives of sentencing at page 15, paragraph 4. 1 as follows:
“Sentences are imposed to meet the following objectives:
1. Retribution: To punish the offender for his/her criminal conduct in a just manner.
2. Deterrence: To deter the offender from committing a similar offence subsequently as well as to discourage other people from committing similar offences.
3. Rehabilitation: To enable the offender reform from his criminal disposition and become a law abiding person.
4. Restorative justice: To address the needs arising from the criminal conduct such as loss and damages. Criminal conduct ordinarily occasions victims’, communities’ and offenders’ needs and justice demands that these are met. Further, to promote a sense of responsibility through the offender’s contribution towards meeting the victims’ needs.
5. Community protection: To protect the community by incapacitating the offender.
6. Denunciation: To communicate the community’s condemnation of the criminal conduct
8. The whole purpose of criminal justice is to reform offenders and not to make them defiant.
9. The Application by the Applicant is rejected and this court directs that he first serves the 15 years imprisonment and then 6 months imprisonment for the offence committed while in prison.
10. The Applicant is warned against engaging in criminal activities while in jail.
11. I accordingly dismiss his undated Application filed in court on 16/12/2019 for want of merit.
Delivered, dated and signed at Kericho this 28thday of July2020.
A. N. ONGERI
JUDGE