Dominic Nzangi Kimeu v Republic [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Case Brief: Dominic Nzangi Kimeu v Republic [2020] eKLR


1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Dominic Nzangi Kimeu v. Republic
- Case Number: MISC. CRIMINAL APPL. NO.18 OF 2020
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Machakos
- Date Delivered: 27th October 2020
- Category of Law: Criminal
- Judge(s): D. K. Kemei
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issue presented to the court was whether the applicant, Dominic Nzangi Kimeu, could have his sentence reduced to the time served based on the provisions of section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, given his claim of having been in custody for 2 years, 6 months, and 6 days.

3. Facts of the Case:
The applicant, Dominic Nzangi Kimeu, was arrested on December 13, 2012, and was unable to raise the bond of Kshs 500,000, resulting in his prolonged custody. He filed an application seeking the court's intervention to revise his sentence, arguing that the time he had already served should be considered and that the sentence should be reduced accordingly. He also provided evidence of skills acquired during his time in custody.

4. Procedural History:
The applicant had previously made several applications regarding his sentence, culminating in the current application for revision. The prosecution, represented by Mr. Martin Mwongera, opposed the application. The court had previously ruled on June 11, 2019, and again on January 17, 2020, indicating that it was functus officio, meaning it could not alter the sentence as requested. The applicant was advised that any appeals against the high court's decision could only be heard by the Court of Appeal under Article 164(3)(a) of the Constitution.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which allows for the consideration of time served when imposing a sentence. However, the court emphasized that it must adhere to the legal principle of functus officio, which prohibits it from altering its previous rulings.
- Case Law: The court referenced its own prior rulings, particularly the ruling on June 11, 2019, which established that any alteration of the sentence would equate to an appeal, a matter outside the court's jurisdiction. Additionally, it noted the constitutional provision that limits the appellate jurisdiction to the Court of Appeal.
- Application: The court applied the rules and case law to the facts presented by the applicant. It concluded that since it had previously ruled on the matter and was functus officio, it could not grant the relief sought by the applicant. The court reiterated that the appropriate recourse for the applicant was to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

6. Conclusion:
The court dismissed the applicant's application, ruling that it lacked merit due to the court's inability to alter the previous sentence. The decision underscored the importance of adhering to procedural rules and the jurisdictional limits of the High Court in matters of sentencing revision.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions in this case, as the ruling was delivered by a single judge, D. K. Kemei.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya at Machakos dismissed Dominic Nzangi Kimeu's application for a sentence reduction based on time served, citing the doctrine of functus officio and the jurisdictional limits imposed by the Constitution. This case highlights the procedural constraints faced by applicants in seeking sentence revisions and reinforces the importance of the appellate process within the Kenyan legal system.