REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU PETITION NO.69 OF 2018 CORAM: CHERERE- J. BETWEEN HELISHA OYOO OYUGI..........................................................PETITIONER AND REPUBLIC.................................................................................RESPONDENT JUDGMENT Introduction 1. HELISHA OYOO OYUGI, (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) was convicted and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment for the offence of Defilement contrary to section 8!) as read with section 8(3) of eth Sexual Offences Act. He appealed in Kisumu High Court Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 2010 which were dismissed and the conviction and sentence were upheld. He subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal in Kisumu Criminal Appeal No.342 of 2011. The Court of Appeal similarly upheld his conviction and sentence. 2. By a petition filed on 12th July, 2018, the petitioner has petitioned this court for resentencing citing his long period spent in custody. 3. Mr. Muia learned counsel for the state submitted that the court has no jurisdiction to review the sentence as sought by the petitioner. Analysis and Determination 4. The Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioki Muruatetu & Another v Republic & 5 others [2016] eKLR that declared the mandatory death sentence unconstitutional has necessitated resentencing of all persons previously sentenced to the mandatory death sentence. 5. The petitioner herein was not sentenced to death and is unfortunately therefore not eligible for resentence. 6. Consequently, the Petition is found to have no merit and it is dismissed DATED AND SIGNED IN KISUMU THIS 1st DAY OF November 2018 T. W. CHERERE JUDGE Read in open court in the presence ofCourt Assistant - Felix Petitioner - Present in person For the State - Mr. Muia
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.