[2016] KEHC 1802 (KLR)
The court found that the law under Section 204 of the Penal Code prescribes a mandatory death sentence for murder, leaving no discretion to the court regardless of mitigating factors. The accused's actions—strangling a young woman without apparent cause and luring her to a lodging to commit the crime—were considered...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 1802 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Accused: Eric Mutua Daniel
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 30 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Sentencing Ruling
- Outcome
- Accused sentenced to death as mandated by law.
- Judges
- CJ Kendagor
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Sentencing, Mandatory Death Penalty, Remorse, Violence Against Women
- 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
Eric Mutua Daniel
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Sentencing Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused should be sentenced to death as mandated by Section 204 of the Penal Code.
- 2 Whether any mitigating factors or emerging jurisprudence justify leniency in sentencing for murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the law under Section 204 of the Penal Code prescribes a mandatory death sentence for murder, leaving no discretion to the court regardless of mitigating factors. The accused's actions—strangling a young woman without apparent cause and luring her to a lodging to commit the crime—were considered particularly heinous and indicative of a troubling trend of violence against women. The court acknowledged the accused's status as a first offender and his time in custody but held that these factors could not override the statutory mandate. Arguments for leniency based on emerging jurisprudence were rejected due to lack of binding precedent and recognition by higher courts....
Court Disposition
Accused sentenced to death as mandated by law.
Orders
- The accused is sentenced to death as provided by Section 204 of the Penal Code.
- The accused has a right to appeal against both conviction and sentence within 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 30 OF 2012
LESIIT, J.
REPUBLIC.........................................................PROSECUTION
VERSUS
ERIC MUTUA DANIEL.…………….…….………….ACCUSED
RULING ON SENTENCE
1. The accused person has been convicted of murder contrary to section 203 of the Penal Code. The sentence for the offence of murder is provided under Section 204 of the Penal Code which provides:
“204. Any person convicted of murder shall be sentenced to death.”
2. Ms. Onunga, learned Prosecution counsel, urged the court to treat the accused as a first offender. I am therefore treating the accused as a first offender.
3. Mr. Were for the accused person urged that the accused was remorseful for the offence and that he was pleading with the court to be lenient to him. Mr. Were urged the court to consider emerging jurisprudence where the court was moving towards correction of offenders rather than punishment. Counsel did not provide any precedent to demonstrate the alleged transformative jurisprudence. I am not aware of such case as the only ones I know of have been declared erroneous due to being per incuriam by the Court of Appeal.
4. I have considered the circumstances of the case. The accused strangled the deceased, a young woman at the prime of her life sniffing her life brutally and without any apparent cause. That was not just senseless, but a worrying trend of violence against women in the society called Kenya. The accused lured the deceased to a lodging place to execute that heinous attack on her. I do not think that he would deserve any leniency even if the law allowed it.
5. I have considered that the accused was arraigned in court for this offence on 19th April, 2012. I have considered that he has been in custody for a period of 4 years and 6 months during the pendency of his trial.
6. I have borne all these factors in mind before passing sentence. I have also considered Section 204 of the Penal Code which provides the sentence for the offence of murder contrary to section 203 of the Penal Code. It is a mandatory sentence for which the court has no discretion.
7. Having considered all these factors and the law, I sentence the accused to death as by law provided.
8. The accused has a right to appeal against both the conviction and the sentence within 14 days from the date of this sentence.
DATED AT NAIROBI THIS 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016.
LESIIT, J.
JUDGE