[2023] KEHC 23619 (KLR)
The court found that the trial court had expressly stated that the period spent in custody by the applicant was to be considered in the computation of the sentence. Therefore, the applicant's claim that section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code was not complied with was unfounded. For clarity, the High Court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 23619 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Peter Kimondo Wanyoike; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Naivasha
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E218 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- GL Nzioka
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Review, Wildlife Offences, Custodial Sentence Computation
- 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
Peter Kimondo Wanyoike
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period spent in custody by the applicant prior to sentencing should be considered in the computation of his sentence.
- 2 Whether the trial court complied with section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in sentencing the applicant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial court had expressly stated that the period spent in custody by the applicant was to be considered in the computation of the sentence. Therefore, the applicant's claim that section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code was not complied with was unfounded. For clarity, the High Court ordered that the applicant's sentence shall run from the date of arraignment, May 19, 2022, but clarified that the period between arraignment and sentencing would not attract remission as the applicant was not serving a sentence during that period. The application for review was thus dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The applicant's sentence shall run from May 19, 2022, the date of arraignment.
- The period from May 19, 2022 to July 26, 2023 shall not attract remission.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Wanyoike v Republic (Criminal Revision E218 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 23619 (KLR) (11 October 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 23619 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Naivasha
Criminal Revision E218 of 2023
GL Nzioka, J
October 11, 2023
Between
Peter Kimondo Wanyoike
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant is applying for review of sentence on the ground that, the period he spent in custody be considered in the sentence meted against him.
2. The applicant was arrested and charged with the offence of dealing in carcass or meat of any wildlife species contrary to section 98(1) of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act 2013, in count one and killing a wildlife species without a permit or other lawful exemption, contrary to section 95(a) of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act (as amended in 2019)
3. He pleaded guilty to both counts and was convicted and sentence to serve three (3) years imprisonment on count 1 and pay a fine of Kshs 50,000 id to serve 12 months imprisonment.
4. As aforesaid, he avers that the provisions of section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code were not considered in the aforesaid sentence. However, I note from the record that the trial court indicated clearly that, the “time spent in custody i.e. to be considered in computation of the sentence”. Therefore the application herein has no merit.
5. However, for clarity, the applicant’s sentence shall run from May 19, 2022 when he was arraigned in court. But the period of May 19, 2022 to July 26, 2023 when he was sentenced shall not attract any remission as he was not serving the sentence. Otherwise the application fails.
6. It is so ordered
DATED, DELIVERED AND SIGNED ON THIS 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023. GRACE L. NZIOKAJUDGEIn the presence of:-Applicant present virtuallyMr. Ndiema for the respondentMs Ogutu court assistant