Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Reading List LLB Criminal Proceedure
Reading List LLB Criminal Proceedure
FACULTY OF LAW
YEAR 2021
Course description
Criminal Procedure is essentially a practical subject concerned with technical rules set out in statutes a n d case
l aw . Grasping t h e s e rules therefore is essential f o r a successful legal career especially for students with
keen interest in criminal practice. The course is intended to equip students with knowledge on general
principles and practicable application of the law on criminal procedure in the lower/subordinate courts, superior
courts of record, as well as, the appellate courts. The course will also enable students to acquire a broad and
critical approach to Criminal procedural rules and regulations. The overall outcome of the course is to equip
students with practical knowledge on procedural aspects of criminal adjectival process to enable them make
better academic and /or effectively participate in criminal
Proceedings as state prosecutors, judicial officers or defense attorneys as well as researchers and, legislators/or policy
makers. Better understanding of the subject r e q u i r e s cross refer enci ng w i t h other course modules: fundamental
principles of criminal law, evidence, and constitutional law. We shall also explore and contextualize emerging
challenges to administration of [Criminal] Justice arising from cross border organized and net-worked crimes such
as terrorism, cybercrime, computer misuse, a clash of culture and legal systems eg 'mato put'.
Core Material
A. Legislation
I. Jurisdiction
1. Ayume: Chapter 3, pg.15-16.
2. Odoki; pg.1-9
3. Richard Card and Jones: Criminal Law ta" Edition Ch.4, pg.45.
4. Uganda Constitution 1995 - Articles 129-139.
5. Judicature Act Cap 13.
6. Magistrates' Courts Act: Sections 1, 2, 3, 31-41, 142, 157, 161 & 166.
7. The Trial on Indictments Act cap 23, Sections 1 & 3.
8. The Penal Code Act Cap 120 S.4 and 5
Cases
1. U vs. James Bitambe (1983) HCB 17
2. Uganda vs. Mustapha Atama, (1975) HCB 254.
3. Kirparam & Sons vs. Khushal Chand (1932-35) 5 ULR 71.
Cases
1. Re Castioni (1891) 1QB149
2. R vs Meunier (1894) 2 QB 415
3. R vs Governor of Brixton, ex Parte Gardener [1968] All ER 636
4. Re Extradition Act 1970, ex Parte Treasury Solicitor General (1961) 1WLR
5. Cheng vs Governor of Pentoville Prison (1973) 2 WLR 746
6. Re an application by the Attorney General of Tanganyika [1958] E 482.
Ill. Summonses. Warrants and Arrests
1. Ayume Chapter 4 .
2" B.J. Odoki: A Guide to Criminal Procedure in Uganda 2nd Edn., pg. 37-44.
3. GW Kanyeihamba: The Law and the Citizens in Uganda, University of EA
Cases
1. M'bui vs Dyer (1967} EA 315
2. Stephen B i r o vs R [1962] EA 61
3. Davey vs Shawcroft (1948)1 All ER 227
4. Mwangi s/o Njerege v s R (1954) 21 EACA 377
5. · Christie v s Leachinsky [194 7] AC 573; [1946] KB 124
6. Karum s /o Njerege v s R (1954)21 EACA 377
7. Beard & Another v s Republic [ 1970] E A 448
8. Wheatley vs Lodge (1971) i All ER 173
9. Joseph Byarugaba vs Uganda [1973] ULR 4
10. Gustus Nsubuga vs Attorney General (1973). 1 ULR 74
11. In the matter of an Application for habeas corpus Nairobi H/C Criminal application No.53/1987
October 1987 Nairobi Law Monthly.
12. Edward Lule Nsimbe vs Ug. (1982)HCB77.
13. U vs D Kamalawo and 4 others (1983 HCB 23.
14. R vs Kapadia Madur (1967) HCB 103 (TZ)
15. Nvule vs A"G (1978) H.C.B 31.
16. Ug vs Jamil Kisegerwa & Another (1978) HCB 137
17. Stephen Oporocha v Uganda [1991] HCB 9
18" Uganda v Kizza [1983] HCB 12
Cases
1. Elias vs Pasmore (1934) 2 KB 164
2. Mohanlal Trivedi vs R [1967] E.A 355
3. Kityo vs Uganda [1967] EA 23
4. Onyango vs Uganda [1967] EA 386
5., Tenywa vs Uganda [1967] EA 102
6. Dritoo vs West Nile District Administration [1968] EA 428
7. Uganda vs Twaha Muyangu [1975] HCB 329
8. Uganda vs Alfred Cox-Odoki (1973] HCB 191
9. Uganda Nuwa Geregere, Crim. Rev. No.14/74 (unreported)
10. Uganda vs Asman Saidio and Another Crim. Rev. No. 100/76
11. Koech vs Republic [1968] EA 109
12. Simon Musoke vs Uganda [1958] EA 715
13. Tumuhairwe vs Uganda (1967] E.A 328
14. Ug. Vs Musisi [1977] HCB 298
15. Kiwanuka and Anor. vs Uganda [1977] HCB 1
16. Ug. Vs G. Siranuye [1977] HCB 21417. Ug. D. Mukasa [ 1978] HCB 318
18 Ndege vs Ug. [1979] HCB 162 (CA)
19. U vs E. Kakooza [1984] HCB 1
20. John Okello v Uganda, Criminal Appeal No. 198 of 1965
21. Uganda v Zakaria Kera [1975] 107
22. Christopher Lubaale v Uganda [1995] VI KALR 36
V. Bail
1. The Constitution, Art. 23(6)
2. Ayume: Chapter 6.
3. Odoki B.J: A Guide to Criminal Procedure Ch.4, pp.69-75.
4. Bryan Gibson. (The Law, Best Practice and the Debate)
5. MCA Sections 75-84.
6. Trial on Indictments Act cap 23 S.14 & 15.
7. Halsbury's Laws of England. Fourth Edition, vol, 11 (2)
CASES
1. Uganda vs. Wilberforce Nadiope M.B. 153/69
2. U vs. Lawrence Luzinda [1986] HCB 33
3. S. Ruparelia vs. Ug (1992-93) HCB 52
4. In the Application of Bail for Balaki Kiirya Misc. Criminal Appeal 65/1984.
5. OPP V Col (RTD) Dr. Kiiza Besigye, Constitutional Reference No.20 of 2005
CASES
1. R vs. Tambukiriza s/o Kiyonga [1958] EA 212
2. Ug vs. Samwiri Baligeya [1977] HCB 223
3. Judagi and Others vs. West Nile District Administration [1963] EA 40
4. R vs. Wandera (1948) 15 MCA 105
5. Ug vs. Lakol [1986] HCB 27
6. Abubakali Amin and Another vs. Uganda (1973) 1 ULR 1
7. R vs. Male [1963] EA 471
8. Ug vs. Mafabi & Another [1976] HCB 172
9. Matu vs. R [1951] EACA 311
10. Uganda vs Kakiki Matovu and Another vs. Uganda [1983] HCB 311
11. Balinda vs. Ug. (1992-93) HCB 41
12. Kayondo vs. Uganda (1992-93) HCB 41
13. Uganda vs. Ndondo & 2 Others [1985] HCB 3
14. Kimeze Another vs. Uganda [1983] HCB 9
15. Uganda v Paulo Muwanga (1988-90) HCB 72
16. Uganda v William lbwokital [1980] HCB 3
17. Stephen Kisuwa & Another v Uganda [1980] HCB 95
18. Uganda v Bambeijo & Another [1981] HCB 4
19. Uganda v Katabazi [1978] HCB 67
20. Uganda v B. Mpaya [1975] HCB 245
21. Mohammed Kayiwa v Uganda [1975] HCB 67
22. Uganda v S. Byaruhanga [1975] HCB 258
23. Uganda v Ocilaje s/o Eragu [1977] HCB 9
24. Honesio Avone v Uganda, Criminal Appeal No. 88 of 1967
Joinder of Charges
M.C.A: Sections 85-87
TIA: Sections 23-24
Ayume: pp.70-75
Cases
1. Alikaeli vs R (1954) 21 EACA 371
2. Yakobo Uma and Another vs. R [1965] EA 542
3. Laban Kati vs. R [1962] EA 439 (K)
4. Sulemani Makerere vs. R (1973) 1 TLR (R) 205
5. R vs Holley and Others (1969) 1969 Crim. Rev. pg.137
6. R vs Petr J. Scarmange 4 7 Cr. App r.2132
7. Uganda v s . Katabazi [1978] HCB 67
8. Uganda vs. Luabye [1986] AC 31
9. R vs. Decree Clayton Wright 35 Cr. App.22
10. Joseph s/o Odare vs. R (1954 21 EACA 311
11. Delip Sigh vs. R [1971] HCB 364.
12. Yolamu Okecho & Another vs. U [1977] HCB 270
13. Uganda vs. Muwonge (1988-90) HCB 72
14. Kato vs. R [1971 HCB 36
15 Nathan vs. R [i965] EA~77
16. Uganda vs. Emmanuel Yigga [1984 HCB 25
17. Bahai vs. R (1971) 200 (TZ)
18. Yowanda Buliza vs. Ug. [1965] EA 439 (CA)
19. Jerinih s/o Swangi vs. R (1951) 18 EACA
20. R vs. Smith (1958) 1 All ER457 (1958} INLR 312 or42 Crim. Appl. R.35
2-1. Kimeze & another VK Uganda f.1983] HC8 q
22. Ug. Vs. Bitambe [1983] HCB 17
23. Uganda vs. Kadi Matovu & Another [1983 HCB
24. Pin vs. Uganda (1992-93} HCB 32
25. Uganda v Amisi [1970] EA 291
26. Yorokamu Okecho & lsaya Okumu v Uganda [1977] HCB 270
27. Yowana Sebuzukira v Uganda [1965] EA 684
CASES
1. Uganda vs. H Tanuel [1964] EA 297
18. R vs. Njidige Bin Aapwana and Another (1939) 6 EACA 118
Njuguna v R [2003] 1 EA 206(CAK) -Whether stating in a charge a lesser amount than that actually stolen
rendered the charge defective or mere irregularity
Amendmentsof Charges
MCA: Section 132
TIA: Section 50
Ayume: pg.81 - 83
Odoki: pg.58
CASES
1. Mbithi Kisoi vs. R (1955) 22 EACA 484
2. Maine s/o Kamunye vs. R (1954) 21 EACA 252 (K}
3. Yusuf Maumba vs. R [1966] EA 167
4. Mutu s/o Gishimu vs. R (1951) 18 EACA 311 (K)
5. Saucier vs. R [1962] EA 30 (S)
6. R vs Pople (1951) 1 KB 53
7. Maulidi Abdullah Chengo vs. Republic (1964] EA 122 (T)
8. M. Odikira vs. Orim, App.No.132/1977.
9. William Sebugenyi vs. R (1959) EA 411
10. Uganda v lsaka lrurnba & 4 others [1978] HCB 229
11. Musoke v R (1956-57) 8 ULR 108
12. Hunter v R (1956-57) 8 ULR 366
13. R v Nyamitare (1956-57) 8 ULR 292
G TRIAL PROCEDURE
1. MAGISTRATE COURTS
Ayume: Ch.8
Odoki B . J : Ch.92-100
PLEAS
1. R vs. Inns 60 Crim. Appeal R. 231
2. Adan vs. R [1975] EA 445
3. Ug vs. Mwebese (1978) HCB 872
R vs. Moses Muwonge and Ug vs Kilama (1992-93) HCB 50
2 others Crim Rev.
145/1977 Ug vs Bwambale & Another [1979] HCB 252
- ~
Ug vs. Wasswa & Others Ug vs Fred Rutoroki [1979] HCB 253
( 1969) KALR 94
Ug vs Haji Zedi Sernuqoya, Crim. Rev. No.235 of 1973. Uganda
Ug vs. Lwanga [1984] v Milenge & Another 1970] EA 269
HCB 20 George Kanalusasi v Uganda (1988-90) HCB 9
CHANGE OF PLEA AND THE FUNCTUS OFFICIO RULE Ayume ch.9, pg. 111-116.
CASES
H ASSESSORS
Ayume Ch.11
Odoki B.J: pp.126-128
Secondary Reading
1. Excerpts from part Ill of Jearey's article 3 UAL 82
2. Sir John Gray - Opinion of Assessors in criminal Trials in East Africa as to
Native Custom - (1985)2 JAL
3. A.W Allot- The Judicial Asertainment of Customary Law in British Africa -
20 ELR 294.
4. Odero, F . W . J . The role and Status of Assessors in East African Judicial
Systems; Journal of Denning L a w Society D S M (12) December
5. Mugamba P, J, (2010) 'Presentation to Uganda Law Society o n Criminal
Justice System in Uganda.
6. Mubiru S (2010) Role of the Defence Attorney in Criminal Trials in Uganda' A paper presented to Uganda
Law Society CLE Training.
CASES
1. Ndirangu s/o Odingo vs. R (1954) 2 EA 878
2. Washington s/o Maingi VR (1954) 21 EACA 39 2 .
3. R. Vs. Mutwiwa s/o Maingi (1935) 2 EACA 66
4. R vs. Kiswaga s/o Luguma (1948) 15 EACA 50
5. R vs. Guzambizi Wesonga (1948) 15 EACA 65
6. R vs. Edimbe s/o Nyandawale (1947) 14 EACA 85
7. Godfrey Tinkamalirwa & Another v Uganda ( 1988-90) HCB 5
8. King Emperor vs. Tirurnali Reddi 24 Madras 529
9. Mahlikilili Dhalamini vs. The King [1942] AC 553
10. Khiza vs. Ug. [1983] HCB 1 2
11.. Kusain Lukoda vs. Ug. [1983] HCB 6
12. Kasule vs. Ug (1992-93) HCB 38
13. Komakech vs. Ug. (1992-93) HCB 21
14. Ocoke v s . Ug (1992-93) HCB 12
15. Kanalusasi vs. Ug (1988-90) HCB 9
16. Kassim M u s a Obura vs . Ug. [1983]HCB 3
17. Birikadde v s . Ug. [1986] H C B 6
18. Bihinganwa vs. Ug. (1986) HCB 2
19. Kinyori s /o Karuditi v R (1956) 23 EALR 48
22. Abdu K o m a k e c h v Uganda ( 1992-93) HCB 21
23. Mohammed Byamugisha v Uganda [ 1987] HCB 4
24. G. Bihinganwa v Uganda [ 1986] H C B 125. R v W. Y. Wilken [1965] HCB 286
26. John Kuka v Uqanda, Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 1992
27. Sula Kasiiria v Uganda S.C.C.A No. 20 of 1993 Summing up to the assessors said to be prejudicial
to the appellant's case
28. Sam Ekolu alias Obote v Uganda S.C.C.A No. 15 of 1994 Omission by the learned trial judge to sum
up the law to the assessors -Whether the whole trial rendered a nullity- Irregular recording of the
assessor's combined opinion
29. Kenge v R [1999] 1 EA 145 (CAK) Absence of assessor- whether court has the power to expel a
sitting assessor or bar his participation due to absence.
30. Bwenge v Uganda [1999] 1 EA 25 (CAU) Effect of the assessor's absence on trial- whether an assessor
who absents herself from part of the trial can resume her role at a later date.
31. Fred Sebahashi v Uganda [1994] V KALR 127 Reasons for departing from advice of the assessors-
Whether the trial court erred in not giving reasons for the departure from the advice of the assessors.
32. Uganda v Hon. Eng. Abraham James Byandala & 7 Ors ACD No. 001 of
2015 (unreported: Gidudu; J)
CASES
1. Amiraliv Ismail vs. R (1952) 1 TLR (R) 370
2. Daudi Wade vs. R (1953) 20 EACA 138
3. R vs. Ali Abdulla Shirazi and another (1956) 23 EACA 550
4. R vs. Kangara s/o Karanjo (1934) 1 EACA 74
5. Akadit s /o Lengobe a n d another v s . R (1951) 1 8 EACA 1 9 3
6. Desiderio Kawunya vs. R ('1953) 20 EACA 2.81
7. Samwiri Senyange vs. R (1953) 20 EACA 277
8. Mugema vs Republic [1967] EA 606
9. Bwire vs. Uganda [1966] EA 539
10. Misango vs. Republic [1969] EA 539
11. R vs. Sena [1971] HCB 208
12. John vs. R [1971] HCB 380
13. lsliam Nkate vs. R (1961] HCB 216
14. Alex Opolot vs Uganda Crim. Appealence 56/72 (GA}
15. Ug vs. Emmanuel Yanga (supra)
16. Ug vs. Benctor Adrabe [1984] HCB 20
17. Ug vs. Okitoyi (1978) HCB 3
18. Uvs. Zikolere and 2 others (1986) HCB 21.
19. Jean Charles Confiance v R [1960] EA 567
20. George Kanalusasi v Uganda (1988-90) HCB 9
21. Uganda v L. Oyang & Another [1980] HCB 4
22. Uganda v Ochola & 2 Others [1981] HCB 8
23. Uganda v Pampilio Edebu [1979] HCB 209
24. Uganda v Yusufu Kasanda & 3 Others [1978] HCB 223
26. Raphael Kiiza & Anor V Uganda (1995) Ill KALR 59 Whether failure to date judgement fatal
27. Karim Bagenda & Ors V Uganda (1994) V KALR 43 Whether a judge may reserve reasons for her judgment.
16. Henry Kayondo V Uganda (1995) Ill KALR 118 Alternative charges s.
86(b)(I)/- Whether an alternative charge must be minor and cognate
17. Avutia V Uganda (1995) IV KALR 115 Whether criminal trespass was minor and cognate to theft.
180 Teopista Tusingwire & Anor V Uganda (1996) VI KALR 75 Whether doing an act intended to cause
grievous harm was minor and cognateto attempted murder.
19. Wini Geyonga Rusheyegera V Uganda (1992) IV KALR Whether the accused can be
convicted of a minor and cognate offence where the prosecution fails to prove all the ingredients of the
offence charged.
J SENTENCING
Odoki Ch.26
Ayume - Chapter 1 4
MCA Sections 162, 164, 165, 172, 173, 175, 186 and 192. TIA Sections 9 6 , 9 8 ,
9 9 , 102, 103, 105, 116, 121, 122
Judges' Role in sentencing EACA 3 1
Law in one party State by Gorge (2) Prisons in Africa; Africa concord 1987
No.155 2ih May. What is wrong with Prisons: Special Report Sundary
CASES
1. Ug vs. Ali Naman Kakooba & Anor. [1976]HCB 262
2. Ug. vs. Kawesa [1979] HCB 171
3. Ug. vs. Okwang (1992-1993) HCB 62
4. Ug vs. Tukei [1974] HCB 127
5. Ug vs. Kiyimei [1986] HCB 6
6. Ug vs. Akaku (1992-93) HCB 49
7. Ug vs. Faibi Alum H.C.C Session Case No.14/96
8. Ug vs. Omara (1992-93) HCB 77
9. Waswero and 2 others vs. Ug (1988-90) HCB 25
10. Ug vs. Katusabe (1988-90) HCB 59
11. Mohammed Yasin Sekayolo vs. Ug (1992) V KALR 0 7
12. Ug vs. Kankiriho James & Bateta Annet
13 Amos Binuge & Others v Uganda (1992-93) HCB 29
14 Uganda v Godfrey Kilama (1992-93) HCB 50
15 Uganda v RA 67828 CPL Lenox Omara (1992-93) HCB 77
16 Uganda v J. Kawesa & Another [1984] HCB 13
17 Uganda v Beneto Adrabo [1984] HCB 28
18 Criminal Revision No. 47of1980 [1981] HCB 6
19 Uganda v Bambeijo & Another [1981] HCB 4 (Manyindo, J Per Curiam)
20 Uganda v Ochola & 2 Others [1981] HCB 8
21. Uganda v Solomon Adoba & Another [1974] HCB 229
22. Amratlal v Uganda [1970] EA 401
24. Uganda v Fred Oyuku, Criminal Revision No. 16of1992
25. Uganda v Kamahanga, Criminal Revisional Order No. 2
26. Mukombe Moses V R S.C.C.A No. 12 OF 1995 Prayer for enhancement of sentence- Whether that is
possible in view that no cross appeal lies before court
27. Sula Kasiira V Uganda S.C.C.A No. 20 of 1993 Whether sentence manifestly harsh and excessive
28. Bimbi Peter V Uganda S.C.C.A No. 33 of 1994 Sentence harsh but justified in circumstances.
29. Adam Owonda V Uganda S.C.C.A No. 8 of 1994 Simple robbery• Given 8.5 yrs custodial sentence, 6 strokes of
the cane and unspecified period of police supervision- whether sentence manifestly excessive• whether compensation
necessary whereupon all stolen property were recovered by the police and returned to the complainant.
30. Mutundi Richard V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2004 Appeal against sentence
3L Uganda V Nabakoza Jackline & 90rs H.C .Ctim Rev. No. 8/2004 Custodial and maximum sentence
32. Barasa Samuel V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal appeal No. 294/2004 Sentence
33. Nyekikyire Moses V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 87/2003 Sentence
34. Wabuluku Johnson V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 158/2003 Sentence
35. Kemboi V R (2001) 1 EA 83 (CAK) Reduction of sentence- Whether court can reconsider sentence of accused
found guilty of some offence other than that charged
36. Mawanda V Uganda (2000) 2 EA 444 (SCU) Appellant convicted of and sentenced for lesser offence -
whether conviction and sentence sustainable
37. Kizito V Uganda (2000) 2 EA 424 (SCU) Principles to consider in sentencing- Account to be taken of
time spent in lawful custody in imposing term of imprisonment-Whether failure to repent could be treated as
aggravating factor in sentencing
38. Nfutimukiza V Uganda (1999) 1 EA 220(CAU) Severity of sentence• Exercise of court discretion in
determining sentence-Factors to be considered before interfering with trial court discretion- Whether sentence was
manifestly excessive
39. Sande Martin V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 278 of 2008 Sentence
40. Abot Richard V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 190/2004 Sentence
41. Agabo Job V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 230/2003 Mitigating factors in sentence.
42. Yunus Wanaba V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 156/2001 Sentence
43. Uganda V Kennedy Ovuru (1995) V KALR 11 Defilement 6yrs for first offender --·Whether excessive
44" Uganda V Kankiruho James & Anor (1996) 1 KALR 70 Theft of cattle c/s 255PC- Whether sentence of 18
month proper when no reasons
are given for the sentence
45. Eza Sebufu V Uganda ( 1995) V KALR 40 Embezzlement-Whether sentence o f 12 month i l l e ga l
46. Livingstone Kakooza V Uganda (1994) V KALR 54 -Principles of law in sentencing - Whether lack
of remorse after conviction was a proper principle to take into account while sentencing. -Whether sentence of
20yrs imprisonment was life imprisonment- Whether a life sentence was excessive for a first offender
convicted of manslaughter.
47. Somali Bamutiire & 2 Ors V Uganda(1994} VI KALR 164 -Period of remand- Whether this includes
period of detention in military and or police custody in reckoning the period of sentence of imprisonment to
be given.
48. Ziwa Mohammed V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 217 of 2003. -Period spent on
remand
49. Nyasio Bumali V Uganda Court of Appeal criminal Appeal No. 197 of
2003-Sentence
50. Luggya Lawrence V Uganda Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 325
Of 2003- Appeal against sentence
51. Guloba Muzarniru V Uganda S.C.C.A No. 6/2004 SentP.nr.P. Should be·
Ascertainable and final
52. Sebule V Uganda S.C.C.A No. 22/2004 -Taking into account t h e period which the accused has
spent on remand
For every count on which conviction is had there must be separate sentence
Omnibus sentences are unlawful;
Ayume: pp.155-157
1. R vs. Musi s/o Usawale [1962] EA 499
2. Effect of L Sajile Salemu vs. Republic [1964] EA 341
3. Uganda vs. Edward Mutyaba [1971] 1 ULR 45
4. Ali Kiggundu v Uganda, Criminal Appeal No. 283 of 1973
5. Sebulini Zongoza v Uganda, Criminal Appeal No. 314 of 1969
The Prevalence of the Crime - With which the accused is convicted may be a factor in assessing the sentence to be
imposed so long as it does not result in a vonvicted man being made the scapte goat of other people who has
committed similar crimes but have not been caught and convicted.
Preventive Detention
Habitual Criminals (Preventive Detention) Act (cap.118) MCA: Section 163
Practice Note - Lord Parker CJ - Published in (1962) All E.R 672.
1. Stefano Ochaya vs. Uganda - High Court Cr. App. No398 of 1964.
2. Francis Othieno vs. Uganda - High Court Cr. App. 236 of 1970/ M.B.113/70
3. Jovamu vs. Uq.
4. R vs Mclean (1911) 1 KB 332
5. R vs Webb ( 1953) 1 ALL ER 1156
6. Mahuku v Uganda [ 1970] H C B 495
7. Ojok v Uganda [ 1970] EA 575
Imprisonment
Consecutive& Concurrent
Ayume pg.161-162.
1. Godfrey Peter Jeils vs. R [1971] HCB 468
2. Robert s/o Nyangan vs. R [1967] HCB 20
3. Kisherilel Dhamirani Agganwa R [1968] HCB 281
4. R vs Oyunya [1970] EA 78
5. Muinin vs R [1973] HCB 86
6. Shikowaya vs R [1970] HCB 399
7. Uganda v C. Aguti w/o Olipa & Another! Criminal Revision No. 91 of 1991
8. Kagube Mohammed V Uganda (1995) VI KALR 1 Theft of cattle C/S 255
PCA- Main and alternative counts-Whether the omnibus sentence on both the main and alternative count
illegal
K FINES
MCA: Section 192(2), 199 and 197
Ayume: Ch14 pg. 166-168
TIA: Sections 110 and 128
Costs
Ayume: Ch.15
Reconciliation
Ayume: pg.185-188
MCA: Section 160
1. R vs. Olworo Benjamin Crim. Rev. No.661 of 1976 (unreported)
2. R vs. Saide Ibrahim [1960] EA 1058
3. Uganda vs. Zadoki Olowo Crim. Rev. No.745of1969 (unreported)
4" Ug. Vs. Kapere [1978] HCB 10
5. Uganda V Swaibu Mukidadi & Anor (1995) II KALR 135 Demanding money with menaces C/S 279PCA-
Whether offence not amenable to reconciliation UIS 156 MCA
Forfeiture
Ayume: pg.188 - Odoki: ch.9, pg. 173
MCA: Section 202
TIA: Section 13i
1. Michola K.. Musoke vs Uganda Crim. Rev. No.216 of 1967
2. Shadrack Kibai vs. R (1954) 21 EACA 604
3. Charles Eweku V Uganda S.C.C.A No.13/90-Wliether an order of forfeiture could be validly made
where the appellant has been acquitted of theft
Bindinq over Order
MCA: Sections 202 & 203
TIA: Sections 119 & 121
1. Joseph Nsubuga vs. Uganda M.B. 133/67; Misc. Crim. App. No. 147-149
Of 1976 (unreported)
Probation
Children Act cap 59
Probation Act (Cap.122) Ayume: pp. ·168-204
Odoki: ch.9, pg.173
1. Uganda vs. Debu s/o Albino Andura Crim. Rev. No.275 of 1971 (unreported) .
2.. Uganda vs. Henry Kayondo [1975] EA 269
3. R. vs. Patrick Matata (1967) HCB 413
4. Amarali Rashidi Raswani vs. R (1967) HCB 205
5. Reventinate Tomimati Magisto vs. R (1968) HCB 154
6. R vs. Hasham [1971] EA 348
7. RV Bukuku (1995-1998) 1 EA 286 What to consider in imposing sentence on juvenile
offenders.
Conditional Discharge
MCA: S.202 and TIA S. 118
1. R vs. Alli s/o Saidi (1967) HCB 364
2. R vs. John Charles Haule (1969) HCB 210
CASES
1. SGT. Kalemera Frank V R S.C.C.A No.18/1994 Sentenced by the general cart martial -Original appeal
to the court of Appeal dismissed• Whether appeal lies properly before the supreme court -What constitutional
provisions are applicable to the appeal
2. Kassim Mpanga V Uganda S.C.C.A. No. 30/1994-Ground of appeal raised new issue not canvassed in first
appeal
3. Shaban Birumbi & Anor V Uganda S.C.C.A No.32/1989-Notice given to review own court decision.
4. Ndungu V R (2003) 1 EA 197 (CAK) Whether appeal arising from conviction for capital offences may
be summarily rejected-Whether high court has jurisdiction to reject appeal which raises points of law
5. Omiat V Uganda (2003) 1 EA 226 (SCU) Record of appeal-Omission ofpart of proceedings-Whether such
omission proper or leads to failure of justice
6. Elirema & Anor V R (2003) 1 EA 50 (CAK) Points raised for the first
time on appeal-Whether court can validily deal with points
7. Kerekona V Uganda (2000) 1 EA 105 {SCU) Lower court making a fundamental mistake in conduct
of proceedings-whether fundamental defect precluding appellate court from deciding on appeal relying on
the lower court proceedings other than to order a retrial or grant an acquittal
8. Semande V Uganda (1999) 1 EA 321 (SCU) Death of appellant• Whether appeal should be
struck out
9" RV Kenya Post AND Telecommunications (1999) 1 EA 250 Record of appeal-Order extracted with
defects- Whether mistakes curable• Whether appeal incurably incompetent
10. Mkurya V R (1995-1998) 1 EA 194 (CAT) Second appeal- When does it lie- Whether court can test
sufficiency of evidence if established that there was some evidence to support a finding of fact
11. Kamori Johnson V Uganda (1995) V KALR 57 Fresh evidence o n
Appeal- w h e t h e r admissible
12. Shaban Mugabi V Uganda (1995) Ill KALR 87 Whether where a person pleads guilty he is precluded
from appealing against conviction
13. Uganda V Kilama Kennedy (1995) Ill KALR 83 Failure to record offence subject of conviction
C/S 133 (3) MCA- Whether this mistake was a subject of revision order
14. Steven Mugume & Fred Mutumba V Uganda (1995) II KALR 8 Appeal
on acquittal and appeal by the appellant on conviction- Procedure to be followed- Whether both appeals may be
consolidated or whether each appeal should stand separately
15. Yakubu Nabala V Uganda (1995) II KALR 124 Plea of guilty- Appeal against conviction s. 216 (3) MCA-
Whether appeal tenable
16. Kassim Mpanga V Uganda ( 1995) IV KALR 1 Whether second appellate court may entertain ground of
appeal that was not raised in the first appellate court
17. Karim Bagenda & Ors V Uganda ( 1994) V KALR 43 Whether court has jurisdiction to entertain appeal when
there has been no conviction in
the trial court.
RIGHT OF APPEAL
"Appeal is the creation of statute. Even the state has no right of appeal unless such right is clearly given."
1. From Grades II and Ill to CM's Court on a matter of law as well as of fact - by ANY PERSON Convicted.
But where convicted on a plea of guilty appeal lies only against sentence.
2. From CM's court and that of Grade 1 to the High Court - on a matter of fact as well as of law - by any
person convicted .
3. But i) where convicted on plea of guilty appeal lies only against sentence.
4. Even then no appeal against sentence if the sentence it is one of the month's imprisonment or a FINE not
exceeding shs.100/-
5. Where an accused has been acquitted.
Where a person is convicted and sentenced to 12 months or less; or convicted and sentenced to a fine exceeding
shs.200/- an appeal lies against conviction only with leave of the Court of Appeal or upon a certificate of the
trial that it is a fit case for appeal.
NOTE: That even if the sentence is a fine not exceeding shs.200 the Court of Appeal or the trial judge may
grant leave or certificate, as the case may be, if, in their own opinion the case involves a question of law of
great importance.
Until recently, the D P P and no right of appeal on acquittal. This means he could not appeal against the decision
of a High Court Judge acquitting an accused. But now by virtue of an amendment effected by Act No.5 of
1985
under section 133A of the TID, the DPP may appeal against such finding on the ground that the appeal
involves a point of law of public importance. But this does not deter an order of trial cause.
Appeal in case referred to a Chief Magistrate for sentence S.160 MCA. Remember that Magistrate Grade I , I I
and lll have power in appropriate case
to commit a person convicted by them to the appropriate Chief Magistrate for
Sentencing.
But the MCA, the CPC and T I D say nothing about the right of appeal of an accused whose case has
been committed to Chief Magistrate for sentencing.
Court of Appeal shall allow the appeal if it thinks that the special finding should be set aside on the
following grounds:
If it is unreasonable or could not be supported having r e g a r d t o the evidence or that the decision is wrong
on a question i t has in fact caused a miscarriage
Of justice.
or on any other ground if the court is satisfied that there has been miscarriage of justice.
NOTICE that special funding means a finding that the accused is not guilty of an offence by reason of
insanity or that he is guilty of murder but with diminished responsibility subsection (5).
COMMENCEMENT
Appeal to commence by NOTICE in writing signed by the appellant or his advocate and shall be lodged with the
registrar within 14 days of delivery of judgment section 326(1) CPC.
Notice of appeal to state briefly the effect of the judgment or order appealed against and must contain:
Full and sufficient address at which relevant documents should be served on appellant or his advocate;
Should state the general grounds of appeal unless appellant first wishes to peruse judgment before
formulating the grounds subsection (2).
Where judgment required first, grounds must be lodged with registrar within 14 days of service of judgment
represented by counsel or appeal is by the OPP include particulars of the matters of law or of fact decided
upon by the lower court.
NOTE - A ground o f appeal t hat the judgment was a nullity against t h e weight of evidence i s not a
good ground o f appeal.
See:
1. Alesure v R (1956) AC 49
2. P. Osiya vs. R, High Court Cr. App. No.3 of 1985 (unreported)
2. Application for extension - to be made to the registrar of the appellate court in writing supported by as
affidavit specifying grounds for the application S.326A (1) CPC.
Appeal may be ABANDONED by notice in writing to the registrar before hearing and on receipt of such
notice appeal will be deemed to have been dismissed by the appellant court - S.328 (A) (3).
NB - Notice withstanding the amendment in the Criminal procedure Code (Amendment) Act - No.23/69
criminal appeals are still to be heard by one judge.
On appeal to Court of Appeal - Judicature Act 1996.
Court of appeal shall be duly constituted consists of an uneven number not being less than three, of Judges of the
Court." Decision of the court is by the majority opinion.
Note: Trial Court's findings as to CREDIBILITY based largely on the demeanor of a witness not to be
reversed unless trial court has drawn a wrong inference from facts.
Additional Evidence