Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

High Court 528 of 2019

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISII (CORAM: R.E OUGO) CRIMINAL CASE NO.31 OF 2018 REPUBLIC............................................................................PROSECUTION VERSUS JOB ATANGA GEITA....................................................................ACCUSED SENTENCE 1. Job Atanga Geita was charged with the offence of murder by an information dated the 24/8/2018. The deceased is Peter Kebiro Okari. The accused person is said not to be a 1 st offender by the Director of Public Prosecution but no records were availed to show that he had a previous conviction. Plea was taken on the 24/8/2018. The accused has been in custody since August 2018 about one year 2 months. 2. The pre-sentence report on the accused is very unfavourable. He is about 34 years. The report states; the community is very negative about the accused and a non custodial sentence is recorded. 3. I have considered his mitigation. In his defence he did not raise the issue of under the influence of alcohol. I listened the witness testify. The accused person on the material day went on a spree of harming people he came across. He murdered the deceased Peter Kebiro in a most gruesome manner. The accused person is a very violent person who does not deserve a non-custodial. He needs to be put away from the society for some time. I therefore sentence the accused person Job Atanga Geita to 40 years imprisonment. He has a right of appeal within 14 days. Dated, signed and delivered at Kisii this 11th November, 2019. R.E. OUGO JUDGE In the Presence; Accused In person Mr. Kaburi Mr.Otieno Ms. Rael For the Accused person Senior state Counsel Office of the DPP Court Clerk

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.