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

Valentine Kwamboka Makei v Republic

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KIBERA CRIMINAL REVISION NO. E053 OF 2026 VALENTINE KWAMBOKA MAKEI….………..………………APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………………………..…….. …...RESPONDENT RULING. 1. The applicant was charged and after a full trial convicted for the offence of manslaughter contrary to section 202 as read with 205 of the Penal Code. She was sentenced to serve fifteen (15) years imprisonment. 2. The applicant filed the present application dated 20 th April 2026 seeking review of sentence on the grounds that he has undergone rehabilitation and should be allowed to serve the remainder of the sentence under a Community Service Order or probation supervision. She urged the court to grant the orders sought. 3. I have considered the application, the grounds in support thereof, and the applicable law. The record of the trial court shows that, in passing sentence, the court considered the applicant’s mitigation, the period spent in remand custody, and the fact that he was a first offender. The sentence imposed was lawful and proportionate in the circumstances of the case. 4. The applicant has not demonstrated any illegality, irregularity, or misdirection warranting interference by this Court on review. Rehabilitation alone is not sufficient ground to vary a lawful sentence properly imposed by the trial court. 5. Accordingly, I find no basis to revise or interfere with the sentence imposed. The application lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. Page 1 of 2

page 1 of 2

Ruling dated and delivered virtually this 3 rd day of June 2026 ______________ D. KAVEDZA JUDGE Page 2 of 2

page 2 of 2

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.