Etyang v Republic (Criminal Revision 20 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 4727 (KLR) (9 April 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 4727 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA CRIMINAL REVISION 20 OF 2026 DR KAVEDZA, J APRIL 9, 2026 BETWEEN MICHAEL OPIYO ETYANG .................................................................. APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant herein was charged before the lower court with the offence of Robbery with Violence Contrary to Section 296(2) of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to five (5) years imprisonment. 2. He has filed the present application undated seeking sentence review. The averments made in support of the application is he has a remainder of two (2) years and 6 months having served 2 years and 4 months in remand custody and suitable for non-custodial sentence. 3. As for his conduct in prison, the applicant has attended a number of trainings and counselling sessions, which have been instrumental in his rehabilitation process. The applicant’s family is also committed to helping him effectively rehabilitate and ensure successful reintegration into the community. 4. In view of the foregoing, it is my finding that the applicant is eligible for early release as the report found in his favour. In my view, the applicant is eligible to a non-custodial sentence. 5. Consequently, the applicant is placed on probation for a period of two years and five months under the supervision of the Kibera Probation Officer. Orders accordingly. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 9TH APRIL 2026 D. KAVEDZA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/4727/eng@2026-04-09 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.