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

Eric Machayo Adede v Republic

Adede v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E130 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 11212 (KLR) (29 July 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 11212 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION E130 OF 2025 DR KAVEDZA, J JULY 29, 2025 BETWEEN ERIC MACHAYO ADEDE ...................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant was charged and after a full trial convicted on five counts of robbery with violence contrary to section 296(2) of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to serve twenty (20) years imprisonment on each count. 2. He filed the present undated application seeking sentence review. The grounds raised are that the sentence served is sufficient rehabilitation. He urged the court to release him. 3. I have considered the application, the grounds in support and the applicable law. From the record of the trial court, the court considered the applicant’s mitigation, the time spent in remand custody and the fact that the applicant was a first offender before sentencing. Having considered the application in its totality. The sentence imposed was also legal in the circumstances of the case. 4. In my view of the foregoing, I find no good cause or reason to revise the sentence imposed by the trial court. The application dismissed for lacking in merit. Orders accordingly. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 29TH DAY OF JULY 2025 ____________ D. KAVEDZA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/11212/eng@2025-07-29 1

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.