SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Peter Odhiambo Odhiambo v Republic [2017] KEHC 3148 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 3148 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
3148
Citation
[2017] KEHC 3148 (KLR)
Decided
11 October 2017
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeMiscellaneous Criminal ApplicationPostureRespondent RespondedCoramD.S. MAJAN, Kwach, Mango
Holding

The Court of Appeal is now seized of the matter and the applicant's application is dismissed. However, the Court directs the Deputy Registrar to place the applicant's case before the Court of Appeal as soon as possible.

Facts

The applicant, Peter Odhiambo Odhiambo, was convicted and sentenced to death for murder in 1992. The record of the trial court is missing, preventing him from exercising his right of appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant can pursue his appeal
  2. Whether the Court of Appeal can determine the appeal

Reasoning

The Court of Appeal has jurisdiction over the matter and the applicant has a constitutional right to appeal. The Court of Appeal is now in charge of the case, and the High Court is functus officio.

Outcome

Dismissed

Orders

  • The Deputy Registrar of the superior court at Kisumu, the prison authorities, and the Attorney-General’s Chambers are ordered to trace the relevant documents and assist the applicant to lodge his appeal

Authorities cited

Cases cited (4)
  • Francis Ndung’u Wanjau v Republic Criminal Appeal No. 187 of 2002 (UR)
  • Isaiah Mutuma alias Duncan Muriithi v Republic NRB CA Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 2006 [2013]eKLR
  • John Ooko Otieno v Republic KSM CA Criminal Appeal No. 137 of 2002 [2008]eKLR
  • John Karanja Wainaina v Republic Criminal Appeal No. 61 of 1993 (UR)
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case