Ochieng & 2 others v Republic [2025] KEHC 8839 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Miscellaneous Application E070 of 2025
Judge
A Mabeya
The High Court at Kisumu struck out an application to substitute death sentences for robbery with violence, holding it lacked jurisdiction after Court of Appeal confirmation.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the application because the applicant failed to file a Notice of Appeal, which is a mandatory requirement for invoking the Court's jurisdiction under its rules and the Constitution.
Imbongo v Director of Public Prosecution [2025] KEHC 610 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Revision E002 of 2024
Judge
S Mbungi
The High Court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain a revision application challenging a death sentence that has been subject to multiple appeals and upheld by the Court of Appeal. Challenges regarding the unconstitutionality of a sentence, even in finalized cases, should be brought by way of a constitutional petition.
The court found that although the delay in filing the appeal was inordinate, the applicant had provided sufficient reasons, including recent developments in jurisprudence regarding the death sentence and the respondent's concession. The court exercised its discretion under Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022, holding that the threshold for extension of time had been met. The applicant was therefore granted leave to file the notice of appeal within 14 days and the record of appeal within 30 days thereafter.
The High Court at Meru sentenced the accused to 10 years’ imprisonment for murder, applying Muruatetu and sentencing guidelines after considering aggravating and mitigating factors.
Cheruiyot "A" Solo v Republic [2024] KECA 1541 (KLR)
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
Criminal Appeal (Application) E114 of 2024
Judge
JM Mativo
The Court of Appeal granted leave to file a criminal appeal out of time after the applicant blamed the delay on late supply of the High Court judgment.
High Court dismissed an application for further resentencing after an earlier Muruatetu-based resentencing, holding there was no basis to revise the resentence.
The High Court struck out a petition seeking review of a conviction and death sentence, holding it lacked jurisdiction to revisit its own final judgment.
The High Court held that it was functus officio, having already determined the applicant's appeal in HCRA No. 59 of 2002, and therefore lacked jurisdiction to entertain the resentencing petition. The court further found that the applicant's appeal to the Court of Appeal was still pending, and thus the applicant had not exhausted the appellate process. Additionally, the court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu does not apply to cases of robbery with violence, as clarified by subsequent Supreme Court guidelines, and therefore the applicant could not rely on Muruatetu for resent…
The High Court dismissed a sentence review application, holding that Muruatetu did not outlaw the death sentence and that no constitutional violation was shown.