Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

High Court 309 of 2019

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISII MISC. APPLICATION NO. 7 OF 2018 1. JOASH SOTA RATEMO 2. NICHOLAS MAGATI OIGO 3. JULIUS NYAKUNDI MASENYA....................APPLICANTS -VERSUSREPUBLIC...........................................................RESPONDENT JUDGMENT- RESENTENCE The applicants, Nicholas Magati, Julius Nyakundi Masenya and Joash Sota Ratemo were charged and convicted of the offence of murder. They were sentenced to suffer death. In their application they have stated that they were sentenced was later on commuted to a life sentence. They were sentenced in 2016. They have been in jail serving sentence since 2016. They state they were remanded for 7 years. They now seek a resentence in light of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Francis K. Muratetu & Another vs RSCK Petition No.15 of 2015 that declared the death sentence to be unconstitutional. I have read the proceedings and the judgment of the High Court. I also note that they have served about 3 years in jail and were held in custody for about 7 years. The prosecution has suggested that they be resentenced to serve 18 years. Having considered all the above and the circumstances of the case I resentence the applicants; Joash Sota Ratemo, Nicholas Magati Oigo, Julius Nyakundi Masenya each to serve 18 years from the date of sentence in court. They have a right of appeal within 14 days. Dated, signed and delivered at Kisii this 3rd day of October 2019. R.E OUGO JUDGE In the presence of; Joash Sota Ratemo Present in person Nicholas Magati Oigo Present in Person Julius Nyakundi Masenya Present in Person Mr. Otieno Senior Prosecution Counsel Office of the DPP Ms. Rael Rael

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.