1. The Applicant was tried, convicted and sentenced by this Court to thirty (30) years’ imprisonment for the offence of murder in Republic v Geoffrey Ogeto Anyona [2019] KEHC 5381 (KLR).
2. Being dissatisfied with both conviction and sentence, he preferred an appeal to the Court of Appeal in Anyona v Republic [2025] KECA 1785 (KLR).The appeal was dismissed in its entirety and the sentence of thirty (30) years’ imprisonment was upheld.
3. The Applicant has now moved this Court by Notice of Motion dated 03rd February 2026 seeking review and reduction of sentence, consideration of time allegedly spent in custody, and resentencing on grounds of mitigation, rehabilitation, age and family responsibilities.
4. The sole issue for determination is whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the application.
5. This Court exercised original jurisdiction in the trial and sentencing of the Applicant. The appellate process was subsequently invoked and culminated in a final determination by the Court of Appeal affirming both conviction and sentence.
6. Once the appellate court pronounced itself on the matter and upheld the sentence, the decision now in force is one affirmed by a superior court.
7. This Court cannot review, vary or interfere with a sentence that has been expressly considered and upheld by the Court of Appeal. To do so would amount to sitting on appeal over a superior court, which jurisdiction this Court does not have.
8. The statutory and constitutional provisions cited by the Applicant do not confer jurisdiction upon this Court to reopen or reconsider a sentence that has already been the subject of appellate adjudication and affirmation.
9. In the circumstances, I find that this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the present application.
10. The Notice of Motion dated 03rd February 2026 is hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
2. Being dissatisfied with both conviction and sentence, he preferred an appeal to the Court of Appeal in Anyona v Republic [2025] KECA 1785 (KLR).The appeal was dismissed in its entirety and the sentence of thirty (30) years’ imprisonment was upheld.
3. The Applicant has now moved this Court by Notice of Motion dated 03rd February 2026 seeking review and reduction of sentence, consideration of time allegedly spent in custody, and resentencing on grounds of mitigation, rehabilitation, age and family responsibilities.
4. The sole issue for determination is whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the application.
5. This Court exercised original jurisdiction in the trial and sentencing of the Applicant. The appellate process was subsequently invoked and culminated in a final determination by the Court of Appeal affirming both conviction and sentence.
6. Once the appellate court pronounced itself on the matter and upheld the sentence, the decision now in force is one affirmed by a superior court.
7. This Court cannot review, vary or interfere with a sentence that has been expressly considered and upheld by the Court of Appeal. To do so would amount to sitting on appeal over a superior court, which jurisdiction this Court does not have.
8. The statutory and constitutional provisions cited by the Applicant do not confer jurisdiction upon this Court to reopen or reconsider a sentence that has already been the subject of appellate adjudication and affirmation.
9. In the circumstances, I find that this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the present application.
10. The Notice of Motion dated 03rd February 2026 is hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction.