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
Wako Robert Salongo v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2025) [2025] UGHC 480 (4 June 2025)
The High Court at Wakiso denied bail to Wako Robert Salongo in an aggravated robbery and conspiracy case, finding a risk of absconding and no exceptional circumstances.
Uganda v Ssemuga and Another (Criminal Appeal 18 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 223 (26 March 2025)
High Court appeal on prima facie case, false pretences, personation, and conspiracy. The court upheld the acquittals on those counts but found one reasoning error.
Ssimbwa & Another v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 78 of 2024) [2024] UGHCCRD 63 (28 October 2024)
The court found that, although the trial magistrate did not explain each ingredient of the offences in detail, the charges and brief facts were read and explained to the appellants in Luganda, their mother tongue, and their responses indicated understanding and acceptance of the facts. The plea-taking process substantially complied with legal requirements, and the appellants' admissions were unequivocal. The court held that procedural anomalies that do not result in a miscarriage of justice do not warrant overturning a conviction. However, the conviction for conspiracy to commit a felony was…
Source excerpt
Ogwang v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 99 of 2014) [2024] UGCA 114 (16 May 2024)
The Court of Appeal found that the sentences imposed by the trial judge for murder (39 years) and aggravated robbery (29 years) were manifestly harsh and excessive when compared to sentencing ranges established by precedent for similar offences. The trial judge's starting point of 35 years for murder was inconsistent with prior decisions, which typically imposed sentences ranging from 20 to 30 years for murder and 16 to 20 years for aggravated robbery, especially where mitigating factors such as a guilty plea and time spent on remand were present. The appellant's admission of guilt, remorse,…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Lijo & Another (Criminal Appeal 10 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 243 (16 April 2024)
The High Court dismissed Uganda’s criminal appeal, upholding the acquittal of two respondents on a charge of conspiracy to commit a felony.
Uganda v Bagaga & 2 Others (Criminal Session 129 of 2018) [2024] UGHC 107 (30 January 2024)
The court found that the prosecution failed to adduce sufficient, credible, and consistent evidence to prove the essential ingredients of murder, arson, and conspiracy to commit a felony against the accused persons. The post mortem reports established death by fire, but the evidence regarding the cause of fire, malice aforethought, and participation of the accused was riddled with grave contradictions and inconsistencies. The forensic investigation was inconclusive and relied on hearsay. Identification evidence was unreliable due to conflicting witness accounts about the accused's actions, at…
Source excerpt
Okoth v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application 168 of 2023) [2023] UGHCCRD 110 (12 September 2023)
High Court bail ruling dismissing Okoth Stephen’s application after finding contradictions in his documents and insufficient assurance he would attend trial.
Osadolor v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 138 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCRD 96 (31 August 2023)
The High Court upheld convictions for computer misuse, electronic fraud, conspiracy, and unlawful stay, finding the circumstantial evidence strong and the sentence justified.
Mugisha Baraka v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 63 of 2020) [2022] UGHCCRD 110 (8 June 2022)
The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against convictions for obtaining money by false pretence and conspiracy, upholding sentence and compensation orders.
Mugisha v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 63 of 2020) [2022] UGHCCRD 156 (8 June 2022)
The court found that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant, acting jointly with others, made false representations to the complainant regarding the sale of gold, obtained substantial sums of money through these misrepresentations, and failed to deliver any genuine gold. The court held that minor inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence did not undermine the material facts establishing the offences. The appellant's argument that he did not personally receive the money was rejected, as the law recognizes constructive receipt through agents. The agreements and…
Source excerpt
