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
Uganda v Mulwo Aramanthan (HCT-04-CR-SC-103-2008) [2011] UGHC 31 (21 March 2011)
High Court of Uganda acquitted the accused at the no-case stage, finding the prosecution evidence on identification, stolen property, and weapon use too weak and contradictory.
Ofwono Samuel v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 17 of 2004) [2005] UGSC 27 (21 December 2005)
The Supreme Court found that the appellant's confession was made voluntarily and was corroborated by both medical evidence and the testimony of eyewitnesses. The confession detailed the planning and execution of the robbery, the injuries sustained by the appellant, and was consistent with the medical report and witness accounts. The Court held that the trial judge and the Court of Appeal properly evaluated the evidence and were correct in convicting the appellant based on the confession and corroborative evidence. Regarding the mandatory death sentence, the Court postponed confirmation of the…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Lutaya & Ors (Criminal Session No. 79/03) [2004] UGHCCRD 10 (21 July 2004)
The High Court acquitted three accused of aggravated robbery after finding the identification evidence unreliable and the prosecution unable to disprove their alibis.
Uganda v Mayeku (HCT-04-CR-0200-2002) [2004] UGHCCRD 6 (15 July 2004)
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused because the identification evidence was made under difficult conditions and was unreliable. There was no corroborative evidence connecting the accused to the offence. The only other witness confirmed the recovery of the bicycle but did not provide evidence implicating the accused. The accused was found at home shortly after the incident, which was more consistent with innocence than guilt. As the essential ingredient of participation was not proved, the accused could not be required to make a defen…
Source excerpt
Ochiti Lagol Patrick v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 15 of 1998) [1998] UGSC 2 (3 December 1998)
The Supreme Court found that the appellant was properly identified by multiple prosecution witnesses who knew him well, and the lighting conditions (from a tadooba lamp and fire) were sufficient for recognition. The incident lasted two hours, allowing ample opportunity for identification. The evidence of rape was corroborated by the victims' testimony and circumstances of abduction and escape. The defence of alibi was rejected as false, and the appellant's intoxication did not negate criminal responsibility, as there was no evidence to support lack of intent. The failure to charge with defile…
Source excerpt
Ochitti Lagol Patrick v Uganda [1998] UGSC 16 (3 December 1998)
The Supreme Court found that the appellant was properly identified by multiple witnesses who knew him well, under sufficient lighting conditions created by fire and a lamp, and during a prolonged incident. The evidence of rape was corroborated by the victims and circumstances of abduction. The defence of alibi was rejected as false, and intoxication was not supported by evidence sufficient to negate intent. The failure to charge defilement instead of rape did not prejudice the prosecution, as the evidence established rape under Section 117. The appeal was dismissed and the convictions and sen…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Mukasa & Ors (Criminal Session Case No. 82/94) [1995] UGHCCRD 4 (31 July 1995)
The High Court of Uganda convicted A1 and A3 of robbery with aggravation and acquitted A2, accepting his defence of compulsion.
Uganda v Opolot & Anor (Criminal Session Case No. 239 of 1993) [1994] UGHCCRD 27 (20 September 1994)
The High Court in Soroti acquitted two accused persons in a robbery case, finding serious contradictions in identification evidence and an uncorroborated dying declaration.
Mawanda Edward v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 4 of 1999) [2000] UGSC 9 (28 February 2000)
The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal erred in relying on an equivocal concession by counsel regarding the appellant's participation in the robbery, without re-evaluating the evidence as required. The evidence of identification was unreliable, and the alleged recent possession of the stolen radio cassette was not sufficiently proved. The trial judge failed to make proper findings of fact and did not adequately direct the assessors. The prosecution did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the radio cassette was stolen during the robbery or that the appellant was found in recent po…
Source excerpt
