Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Uganda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Africa Wycliff and Magabali Ismail alias Jose v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 522 of 2016) [2023] UGCA 284 (20 October 2023)
The Court of Appeal partly upheld a plea-bargain challenge, correcting both appellants’ sentences for failure to apply remand time and keeping victim compensation for the first appellant.
Arac v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 297 of 2014) [2023] UGCA 234 (16 June 2023)
The Court of Appeal found that although the trial judge generally considered the period spent on remand as required by law at the time, he failed to observe the principle of consistency in sentencing for similar offences, as set out in the Sentencing Guidelines. The sentence of 20 years on both counts was manifestly excessive, especially since only one victim suffered physical injury. The appellate court reviewed precedents and determined that sentences for aggravated robbery with harm typically range from 10 to 20 years, with the degree of violence as the main aggravating factor. The court s…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Barugindoho (Criminal Session 150 of 2016) [2022] UGHCCRD 50 (12 October 2022)
The High Court at Masindi convicted Barugindoho Joseph of aggravated robbery, finding reliable identification, use of violence, and participation proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Uganda v Ainomugisha and Another (Criminal Session 3 of 2019) [2020] UGHCCRD 165 (14 August 2020)
The High Court convicted two accused persons on their guilty plea to aggravated robbery, imposed seven years, eleven months and seventeen days each, and ordered compensation.
Uganda v Atiku & Anor (High Court Criminal Session Case No.155 of 2014) [2014] UGHCCRD 98 (16 July 2014)
The court held that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Attorney General v. Susan Kigula & 417 others, the mandatory death penalty for murder is unconstitutional and each case must be considered on its own merits with regard to mitigating factors. In this case, the convicts were first offenders, the victim survived and recovered from her injuries, and the convicts had already spent four years on remand. The facts did not place the case in the 'rarest of the rare' category warranting the maximum sentence. The court therefore imposed a sentence of 10 years' imprisonment for each convict,…
Source excerpt
