Share
Itembe Palasi v Uganda (Criminal Confirmation No. 1/93) [1993] UGHCCRD 2 (5 July 1993)
- Citation
- [1993] UGHCCRD 2
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Kato, J
- Case number
- Criminal Confirmation No. 1/93
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Kato, J
- Case number
- Criminal Confirmation No. 1/93
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court confirmed the consecutive sentences of 12 months for shop breaking and 24 months for theft, totaling 36 months imprisonment, on the basis that the trial magistrate's reasoning was sound and the sentence was reasonable in light of the accused's admission of guilt and prior similar convictions. The confirmation was made after careful consideration of the circumstances and the need for deterrence and proportionality in sentencing repeat offenders.
Court disposition
sentence_confirmed
Orders
- The consecutive sentence of 36 months imprisonment imposed upon Peter Itembe Palasi is confirmed.
02
Material facts
Parties
Peter Itembe Palasi
DefendantUganda
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Total Imprisonment Term Months: 36
- Imprisonment Term Count 1 Months: 12
- Imprisonment Term Count 2 Months: 24
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Confirmation / Sentence Confirmation
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the sentence imposed by the trial magistrate for shop breaking and theft was reasonable and should be confirmed.
- 02
Whether consecutive sentences totaling 36 months imprisonment are appropriate given the accused's prior convictions.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Penal Code Act, sections 283(a) and 252
Sentencing for shop breaking and theft must reflect the gravity of the offences and the accused's criminal history.
- 02
Ugandan sentencing practice
Judicial confirmation of sentences requires consideration of the trial magistrate's reasoning and the circumstances of the case.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court confirmed the consecutive sentences of 12 months for shop breaking and 24 months for theft, totaling 36 months imprisonment, on the basis that the trial magistrate's reasoning was sound and the sentence was reasonable in light of the accused's admission of guilt and prior similar convictions. The confirmation was made after careful consideration of the circumstances and the need for deterrence and proportionality in sentencing repeat offenders.
Court disposition
sentence_confirmed
- The consecutive sentence of 36 months imprisonment imposed upon Peter Itembe Palasi is confirmed.
Source and reliance status
HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)
Judgment
Mon Justice Jsekeho
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT JINJA
CRIMINAL CONFIRMATION NO. $1/93$
PETER ITEMBE PALASI :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: VERSUS
UGANDA :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
BEFORE:
THE HON. MR. JUSTICE C. M. KATO
O R D E R <table>
This file was passed to me for the purpose of confirming a sentence of 36 months imprisonment imposed upon the accused person Peter Itembe Palasi. The accused was charged with two counts one of which was for shop breaking contrary to section 283(a) of the Penal Code Act and the other was for theft contrary to section 252 of the Penal Code Act.
He pleaded guilty to both counts. He was sentenced to 12 months in respect of count 1 and 24 months for the second count. The court ordered the sentences to run consecutively. The accused had two other convictions of similar nature which he admitted.
I have carefully considered the reasons which prompted the trial magistrate to impose the sentence which he did impose and I feel those reasons are quite sound. I consider the sentence imposed to be reasonable in all the circumstances of this case. I accordingly do confirm the consecutive sentence of 36 months.
> C. M. KATO JUDGE $5/7/93$
$\mathcal{A}^{(n,k)}=\bigcup_{\substack{1\leq i\leq n\\ 1\leq j\leq n}}$ $\mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L}$
$\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot$ $\mathbb{V}^{\mathbb{R}}_{\mathbb{R}} \oplus_{\mathbb{R}} \mathbb{V}_{\mathbb{R}} \oplus_{\mathbb{R}} \mathbb{V}^{\mathbb{R}}_{\mathbb{R}}$ $\mathcal{H}^{\prime}$
$\mathbb{L}_{\mathbb{R}}\mathbb{M}_{\mathbb{R}}(0) = \mathbb{H}$
submits a passes on a 3 month base of factors of CERSION AND LOCAL DAVISON'S Process to a 11 min and 12 th car person responsible the convention of the convention of $\sim$ 25 km was not a factor of Lag part to $\langle \hat{a} \rangle$ and the state of the text of the state of the state of of bayedon an at a base on a the life bat up binder are with using the particular to traiting the
uplay a meaning only of the theorem is breakned them with a final turn prime to the "d" in a liver sector profile but be all $\hat{V}$ : $\hat{w}$ $\rightarrow$ $\hat{w}$ $\hat{w}$ $\mathcal{P} \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times \lfloor n \rfloor}$
uid beteening gutte Answer to do, or after U after the princial sangul ibi in felos scolus of a such sharing of the and as an instrumed to the figure in a manager to the property of an Fals) 16 Me ayusunay in "fase iuu est und Tage ook May Katelyak f
$\{P_{\lambda}\}_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}$
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.