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 Buchanayandi Godfrey and Others (Criminal Session No. 0057 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 334 (19 February 2025)
The High Court convicted five accused of rape, attempted rape, and robbery after accepting the victim’s evidence, corroboration, and rejecting alibi defences.
Mudde v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 271 of 2015) [2023] UGCA 18 (18 January 2023)
The Court of Appeal found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant committed the offences of rape and simple robbery. The medical evidence did not corroborate the victim's account of rape, and the victim's initial failure to disclose the rape undermined the reliability of her testimony. The identification evidence was insufficient, as the appellant's alleged relationship to the victim and other witnesses was not established, and the conditions at the time of the offence (nighttime, stress, and lack of familiarity) were not conducive to positive identific…
Source excerpt
Muligande Zyedi v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 2013) [2021] UGCA 1 (3 February 2021)
The Court of Appeal re-evaluated the evidence, upheld convictions for murder and simple robbery, and set aside an omnibus sentence as illegal.
Naminsi & 2 ors v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 118 of 2013) [2019] UGCA 2065 (19 November 2019)
The Court of Appeal found that the failure to record the presence of assessors during part of the trial was an irregularity but did not cause a substantial miscarriage of justice, especially since no objection was raised at trial. On the merits, the prosecution proved theft, use of violence, and participation of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt, but failed to prove the use of a deadly weapon as required for aggravated robbery, since no pistol was produced or corroborated. The evidence supported a conviction for simple robbery, not aggravated robbery. The sentence of 30 years for aggrava…
Source excerpt
Kenyanya Godwill v Uganda (Criminal Application No. 160 of 2013) [2019] UGCA 2062 (19 November 2019)
The Court of Appeal quashed an aggravated robbery conviction, substituted simple robbery, and varied the sentence after finding the deadly weapon element was not proved.
Uganda v Asea (Criminal Session No. 1234 of 2016) [2019] UGHCCRD 6 (7 February 2019)
The High Court convicted Asea Denis of simple robbery after finding the aggravated robbery charge failed only on proof of a deadly weapon.
Erongu & Ors v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 0017 of 2016) [2017] UGHCCRD 86 (19 April 2017)
The High Court upheld a 3-year sentence and compensation orders for malicious damage and robbery, but ordered the sentences to run concurrently.
Uganda v Kibaya & Ors (Criminal Session Case No. 0009 of 2004) [2009] UGHCCRD 32 (25 November 2009)
The High Court held that count one did not prove aggravated robbery because no deadly weapon use or threat was shown, but simple robbery was proved. Count two ended in aggravated robbery convictions.
Uganda v. Bbosa Godfrey & Ors (HCT-05-CR-SC-0211 OF 2002) (HCT-05-CR-SC-0211 of 2002) [2003] UGHC 33 (15 May 2003)
The court found that the prosecution proved theft and violence beyond reasonable doubt, but failed to prove the use or threat of a deadly weapon as required for aggravated robbery, since the gun was neither fired nor properly linked to the crime. Identification evidence against A1 was deemed unreliable due to lack of an identification parade and inconsistencies in witness statements. The doctrine of recent possession was applied to A2, who was found with the stolen clock and failed to provide a satisfactory explanation, thereby disproving his alibi and establishing his participation in the ro…
Source excerpt
Uganda v Byabagambi Rwakirenzi and Another (HCT-05-CR-SC-0215-2002) (HCT-05-CR-SC-0215-2002) [2002] UGHC 9 (2 January 2002)
The High Court acquitted the accused of aggravated robbery but convicted him of simple robbery after finding theft, violence, and participation proved, but not use of a deadly weapon.
