Kenya Case Law

Mbati v Republic

Mbati v Republic (Criminal Revision E228 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 13020 (KLR) (21 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Revision E228 of 2024

Judge

["JN Onyiego"]

The application failed because the High Court’s revision jurisdiction is limited to legality, correctness, and propriety under the Criminal Procedure Code, and no appeal or illegality in sentence was shown. Compensation to the victim’s family did not amount to new compelling evidence or a ground for resentencing, and the court had become functus officio on sentence.

Source excerpt

• Revision of sentence
• Jurisdiction
• Functus officio
• Compensation to victim's family
• Resentencing
• Appeal versus revision

Mbithi v Republic

Mbithi v Republic (Criminal Appeal E080 of 2024) [2026] KECA 1305 (KLR) (10 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeal E080 of 2024

Judge

["WK Korir", "L Ndolo", "AI Hassan"]

The appellant was positively identified in broad daylight immediately after the robbery, the alleged inconsistencies were minor and non-fatal, the courts below properly re-evaluated the evidence, the legal-representation issue was not open for determination on second appeal because it was not raised below, and the death sentence for robbery with violence remains lawful under section 296(2).

Source excerpt

• Robbery with violence
• Identification evidence
• Single identifying witness
• Inconsistencies in evidence
• Second appeal on matters of law
• Right to legal representation

Mutuma & another v Republic

Mutuma & another v Republic (Criminal Appeal E039 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 8988 (KLR) (16 June 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Appeal E039 of 2025

Judge

["HM Nyaga"]

The prosecution proved robbery with violence beyond reasonable doubt through evidence of armed attackers acting in company and using violence, and the complainant and another witness recognized the appellants shortly after the attack while they wore the same clothes. The defence did not create reasonable doubt. The conviction was therefore upheld. On sentence, the trial court erred in imposing life imprisonment because the lawful penalty for robbery with violence is death, but the sentence was not enhanced because the DPP gave no notice of enhancement and doing so would be prejudicial.

Source excerpt

• Robbery with violence
• Identification evidence
• Recognition
• First appellate court duty
• Defence evaluation
• Mandatory sentence

James Ochom Odionyi v Republic

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeal 194 of 2018

Judge

["DK Musinga", "PO Kiage", "GV Odunga"]

The Court of Appeal upheld James Ochom Odionyi’s conviction for robbery with violence, finding he was reliably recognised by witnesses and that the death sentence challenge failed.

• Robbery with violence
• Recognition evidence
• Voice identification
• Identification parade
• Alibi defence
• Second appeal jurisdiction

Mbuvi Kabwere Lawrence v Republic

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeal 48 of 2017

Judge

["W Karanja", "DK Musinga", "S ole Kantai"]

Second appeal against a life sentence for defilement of an 8-year-old child. The Court of Appeal held the mandatory sentence under section 8(2) remained binding and dismissed the appeal.

• Defilement
• Mandatory minimum sentences
• Life imprisonment
• Second appeal
• Muruatetu applicability
• Judicial discretion in sentencing