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
Umutoni Vs Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 855 of 2014) [2019] UGCA 147 (13 June 2019)
The Court of Appeal upheld Umutoni Annet’s convictions for trafficking-related offences, rejecting claims of duplicity, bias, and excessive sentence.
Uganda v Bizibu & Anor (Hct-03-cr-sc-0092 of 2010) [2010] UGHC 180 (9 November 2010)
The court found that the prosecution proved the occurrence of aggravated robbery, including theft, violence, and use of deadly weapons, beyond reasonable doubt. The doctrine of recent possession was applied, as stolen property was recovered from Bizibu Vincent's residence shortly after the robbery, and he failed to provide a credible explanation for possession. Visual identification evidence was deemed unreliable due to contradictions in witness statements. The defence of Bizibu Vincent was rejected as an afterthought, and he was placed squarely at the scene by prosecution witnesses. Kulabako…
Source excerpt
Mwesigwa Semu & Anor v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 2003) [2009] UGCA 10 (31 March 2009)
The Court of Appeal of Uganda quashed robbery and rape convictions after finding the identification evidence unreliable and the rape charge unproven.
Uganda v Murangira Eriyasafu & anoer (HCT-05-CR-SC-0229-2003 ) (HCT-05-CR-SC-0229-2003) [2005] UGHC 127 (21 April 2005)
The High Court of Uganda acquitted two accused of murder after finding the identification evidence unreliable and the prosecution had not disproved their alibis.
Uganda v Rwomwani (HCT-05-CR-SC-0219-2003) [2005] UGHCCRD 10 (11 April 2005)
The court found that while the death of the deceased and the unlawful nature of the killing with malice aforethought were proved beyond reasonable doubt, the prosecution failed to prove the accused's participation in the crime beyond reasonable doubt. The identification evidence provided by PW1 was not sufficiently reliable, given the circumstances and the accused's plausible alibi, which was not disproved by the prosecution. The accused's actions after the incident were consistent with innocence, and the possibility of mistaken or afterthought identification could not be excluded. Consequent…
Source excerpt
