Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealPartially AllowedCriminal Appeal 228 of 2019

Odio v Republic (Criminal Appeal 228 of 2019) [2024] KECA 1530 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
29 October 2024
HOHannah OkwenguJMJ. MativoJNJoel Ngugi
346 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal ruled that a man's 30-year prison sentence must count from 2016, crediting his eight years in remand custody.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short supplemental order of the Court of Appeal at Kisumu (Okwengu, Mativo and Ngugi, JJA) issued on 29th October 2024, following the full bench's judgment delivered on 20th September 2024 by a Single Judge on the Go To Meeting Virtual Platform. In that judgment the appellant's appeal against conviction was dismissed, while the appeal against sentence was allowed to the limited extent that the death penalty was substituted with life imprisonment, which was translated to a determinate term of thirty years' imprisonment. After delivery of the judgment, the appellant requested the benefit of Section 333 of the Criminal Procedure Code, having remained in custody throughout his trial. Because the matter required the full bench to confer, the appellant was informed he would be advised of the position in due course. The full bench perused the record of appeal and established that the appellant was first arraigned in the High Court on 30th August 2016, was denied bail on allegations of interference with witnesses, and therefore remained in remand throughout the trial. Applying Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Court ordered that the sentence of thirty years' imprisonment be computed to run from 30th August 2016. The Court further directed that a copy of the order be served on the appellant and the in-charge of the prison where he is held. The order is signed by all three Justices of Appeal and certified by the Deputy Registrar. No costs order was made and no new authorities were cited.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the appellant, having remained in remand custody throughout his trial, was entitled to the benefit of Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in computing his sentence

Key legal issues

#
01

Entitlement to credit for time spent in remand custody under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code

Holding

The appellant, who was first arraigned on 30th August 2016 and remained in remand throughout the trial, was entitled to have his sentence computed from the date of arraignment.

Reasoning

After the full-bench judgment delivered on 20th September 2024 dismissed the appeal against conviction but reduced the death penalty to 30 years' imprisonment, the appellant requested the benefit of Section 333(2). The full bench perused the record, confirmed the appellant was denied bail on allegations of interference with witnesses and remained in remand throughout the trial, and directed that the sentence run from the date of first arraignment.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Where an accused person remained in custody throughout the trial, the sentence imposed must be computed to run from the date of first arraignment under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The sentence of thirty (30) years imprisonment shall be computed to run from August 30, 2016, in accordance with Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
  2. 2.A copy of this order shall be served on the appellant and the in-charge of the prison where he is being held

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

HO
majority

Wrote the judgment

JM
majority

Wrote the judgment

JN
majority

Wrote the judgment

On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Busia
HCCRA No. 23 of 2016
Jurisdiction invoked
The judgment of the full bench delivered on 20th September 2024, with this order issued under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code

Quotable passages

#

Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.

Accordingly, in accordance with Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code the sentence of thirty (30) years imprisonment shall be computed to run from August 30, 2016.
p. 1Computation of sentence from date of first arraignment where accused was in remand custody
The appellant’s appeal against conviction was dismissed, but the appeal against sentence was allowed to the limited extent of substituting the death penalty to life imprisonment and translating the indefinite life imprisonment to a term of thirty (30) years imprisonment.
p. 1Outcome of the appeal as delivered on 20th September 2024

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

The judgment refers to substituting the death penalty with life imprisonment, then translating that to thirty years; the sentence computation order refers only to the thirty-year term, and the basis for the translation to a determinate term appears in the earlier judgment not reproduced here.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (2)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Odio v Republic (Criminal Appeal 228 of 2019) [2024] KECA 1530 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Criminal Appeal 228 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2024/1530/eng@2024-10-29

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.