[2015] KEHC 3856 (KLR)
The court, having convicted the accused of murder under Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code, found no mitigating circumstances or legal basis to depart from the mandatory death sentence. The probation report was considered but found unhelpful, and the accused did not offer any reasons against the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 3856 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Defendant: Duke Ronald Kereu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisii
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 50 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Sentencing
- Outcome
- accused sentenced to death
- Judges
- CB Nagillah
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Sentencing, Death Penalty
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Republic
Respondent
Duke Ronald Kereu
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Sentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused should be sentenced to the mandatory death penalty for murder under Kenyan law.
Ratio Decidendi
The court, having convicted the accused of murder under Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code, found no mitigating circumstances or legal basis to depart from the mandatory death sentence. The probation report was considered but found unhelpful, and the accused did not offer any reasons against the imposition of the statutory penalty. The court therefore sentenced the accused to death in accordance with the law.
Court Disposition
accused sentenced to death
Orders
- The accused is sentenced to death in accordance with the law.
- The accused has a right of appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISII
CRIMINAL CASE NO.50 OF 2009
REPUBLIC
VERSUS
DUKE RONALD KEREU - ACCUSED
SENTENCING
1. The accused person herein, Duke Ronald Kereu, was convicted of the offence of murder with which he was charged contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. By judgment delivered on 9th January 2015 the court found him guilty as charged and convicted in accordance with Section 328(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
2. In accordance, therefore, with Section 322(2) this court is to pronounce sentence in accordance with law.
3. The court called for the Probation Report which report was filed on 23rd April 2015. I have read the said report in details but also with great circumspection. I say with circumspection because the accused was found guilty of heinous crime of murder, murder of one’s mother. The report is not helpful, in my considered view.
4. A person convicted of murder is liable to be sentenced to death. The accused has not given any reason why the court should not sentence him to the mandatory death sentence. He is an adult and normal. Accordingly, I sentence the accused to death in accordance with the law. He has a right of appeal.
Dated, signed and delivered in open court this 10th day of July, 2015.
HON. C. B. NAGILLAH
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Otieno for State
M/S Kaburi for Accused
Samuel Omuga: Court clerk