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
Barahuka v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 519 of 2015) [2024] UGCA 255 (4 September 2024)
The Court of Appeal upheld a conviction for aggravated robbery, holding that a toy gun is an imitation weapon under the Penal Code and confirming an 18-year sentence.
Saaka & 2 Ors v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2015) [2020] UGCA 2 (6 January 2020)
The Court of Appeal upheld identification evidence, reduced aggravated robbery to simple robbery, confirmed attempted murder convictions, and adjusted sentences and compensation.
Baguma Stephen and Anor v Uganda [2003] UGSC 40 (11 November 2003)
The Supreme Court held that the trial and appellate courts properly evaluated the evidence, including the identification of the appellants and the rejection of their alibi defences. The Court found that the conditions at the scene allowed for correct identification, and that discrepancies in the prosecution's case were minor and did not undermine the reliability of the evidence. On the issue of deadly weapons, the Court agreed with the trial judge that pangas and knives, as described by the witnesses, fit the statutory definition of deadly weapons. The Court distinguished the present case fro…
Source excerpt
Situma & 2 Others v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 9 of 2000) [2000] UGSC 33 (21 November 2000)
The Supreme Court found that the inconsistencies in the prosecution witnesses' testimonies were minor and not intended to mislead the court. The evidence established that violence was used in the theft, as the complainant was assaulted and left for dead, and the vehicle was taken without his consent. The hammer used in the assault was a deadly weapon within the meaning of the Penal Code, and its use justified the conviction for aggravated robbery. The absence of medical evidence regarding the injuries was immaterial, as the law requires only proof of use or threat of a deadly weapon. The hear…
Source excerpt
PC Mulwani and Another v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 3 of 1992) [1993] UGSC 31 (31 December 1993)
The Supreme Court found that the trial judge had properly evaluated the evidence and that the identification of the appellants was reliable, having occurred in broad daylight and confirmed by multiple witnesses. The pistol recovered from the first appellant was deemed a deadly weapon based on both police and expert testimony, and the failure to establish the expert's qualifications did not result in a miscarriage of justice. The extra judicial statement was admissible as it was made voluntarily and did not amount to a confession. The appellants' alibi was properly rejected as false, given the…
Source excerpt
