PLEAS

PLEAS
A plea is an answer to a charge. It may be an admission or a denial to a

charge. It may be a defence or an objection to the charge being brought
against the accused. That being the case, there are various types of pleas that
an accused can raise at the time of pleading or at his trial.
The possible pleas are;
1. A PLEA OF GUILTY
2. A PLEA OF GUILTY TO A LESSER CHARGE
3. AMBIGUOUS PLEAS
4. REFUSAL TO PLEAD
5. UNFITNESS TO PLEAD OR TO BE TRIED
6. PLEAS OF AUTRE FOIS AQUIT OR AUTRE FOIS CONVICT OR
PARDON
7. A PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION
8. A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY
PLEA OF GUILTY
If the accused pleads guilty to all charges, the accused is either sentenced
immediately or remanded for reports. It is however important that the
accused personally pleads guilty. It is insufficient for the advocate to say that
the accused wishes to plead guilty. Where there is more than one accused,
and one pleads guilty and the other pleads not guilty, the usual practice is to
postpone the sentencing of the accused who pleads guilty until the end of the
trial of the accused who pleads not guilty.
PLEA OF GUILTY TO A LESSER OFFENCE
The accused may plead not guilty to the offence charged and plead guilty to
another offence of which the accused is not charged. i.e an accused charged
with burglary may plead to that offence and plead guilty to theft. If the
prosecution accepts a plea to the lesser offence and the judge approves it, the
accused will be acquitted of the offence charged and sentenced for the lesser
offence. If the prosecution refuses to accept a plea of guilty to the lesser
offence, the trial must proceed on the basis of the offence as charged and if the
jury acquits the accused of that offence, the accused cannot be sentenced for
the lesser offence even though they intended to plead guilty to it.
AMBIGUOUS PLEA
Sometimes an accused may plead guilty but at the same time make statements
which qualify the plea. For example where a person charged with handling
stolen goods by receiving them pleads guilty to this offence but states that
they did not know that the goods were stolen, the plea is ambiguous.
If the accused continues to plead in this manner a plea of not guilty should be
entered. Where the plea is ambiguous and the court wrongly considers it to be
a guilty plea, the appellate court may quash the conviction or order that a not
guilty plea be entered and the appellant tried on the indictment.
REFUSAL TO PLEAD
Where the accused refuses to plead or remains silent when asked how they
wish to plead, a plea of not guilty should be entered. S.124 (4)
PLEAS OF AUTREFOIS ACQUIT OR AUTRE FOIS CONVICT
These two pleas- meaning previously acquitted and previously convicted

respectively are based on the fundamental principle of English law that a
person is not to be prosecuted twice for the same offence. Where one or the
other plea is successfully raised, it bars all further proceedings for the same
offence.
Autre fois acquit is a fundamental principle of law that a man nay not be put
twice to jeopardy for the same offence. This term commonly means that if a
man has been tried and found not to be guilty of an offence by a court of
competent jurisdiction, the acquittal will be a bar to a subsequent charge for
the same offence. S.89 MCA.
Autre fois convict on the other hand is to the effect that the accused cannot be
convicted of an offence which is the same as that of which he was previously
charged and convicted. This rule was stated in the case of R v Thomas. In this
case the accused was convicted of wounding his wife with intent to murder
her and was sentenced to seven years imprisonment. Within a year after the
wounding, the wife died. The court of appeal held that although the accused
had been convicted and sentenced for the wounding, he could properly be
tried for the murder and could not plead autre fois convict. Here the death
supervened as a result of the attack and the fact that the attacker had already
been convicted of a lesser offence relating to the attack was no bar to the
subsequent charge and conviction of murder.
In R v Daudji, it was stated that the test is not whether the facts relied upon
are similar but whether the accused has been tried and convicted of an offence
which is the same as that with which he is charged.
PARDON.
Under article 121 of the 1995 constitution, the president of Uganda can
exercise his prerogative of mercy by granting pardon to a person convicted of
a criminal offence.
When a plea of autre fois acquit, autre fois convict or pardon are raised, this
will become a triable issue of the court. The court will have to determine and
decide on the evidence whether such plea is true or false.
s.93(a) MCA provides that a previous conviction or acquittal can be proved by

an extract certified under the hand of the officer having custody of the records
of the court.
A PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION
The accused can plead that the court has no jurisdiction to try the charges
preferred. Such a plea must be in writing. The accused can plead not guilty in
addition to pleading lack of jurisdiction or demurrer. This is most common in
civil matters.
A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY.
An accused may plead not guilty to some or all the counts on the indictment
where he is charged with more than one offence.
RECORDING OF PLEAS.
Having checked that the charge is in order, the magistrate will read and
explain out the charge to the accused and ask the accused to state whether he
understands the substance of the charges against him. S. 124 of the MCA lays
down the procedure of recording pleas in a magistrate’s court. This procedure
was also set out in the case of Adan v R.
According to this case, when an accused person is charged with an offence,

the charge and the particulars of the offence thereof should be read out to the
accused so far as possible in his own language but if that is not possible then
in the language he can speak and understand.
Thereafter the court should explain to the accused the essential ingredients of
the charge and he should be asked if he admits them. If the accused admits
the truth of the charge, his answer should be recorded as nearly as possible in
his own words and then a plea of guilty formerly entered.
If the accused doesn’t agree with the facts as stated by the prosecutor or
introduces additional facts which if true might raise a question as to his guilt,
a plea of not guilty should be recorded and the trial proceeds.
If the accused doesn’t dispute any of the alleged facts, a conviction should be
recorded and further facts relating to the question of sentencing should be
given before the sentence is passed.
CHANGE OF PLEAS.
An accused person is free to change his plea at any time during the
proceedings provided he does so before sentence is passed upon him. An
accused may with the leave of the court change a plea of not guilty and plead
guilty to all or some of the counts. The normal procedure in such cases is for
the relevant charges to be put to the accused again and for the accused to
plead guilty to them.
It should be noted that a change of plea from a plea of guilty to a plea of not
guilty should be allowed only in very clear cases e.g due to a language
problem the accused may have misunderstood the charge. It should also be
noted that not every accused who wants to change what is clearly a plea of
guilty should be allowed to do so at his won convenience.
In R v Patel and another, it was held that once sentence had been passed upon
a person who has un equivocally pleaded guilty, he cannot afterwards be
allowed to retract the plea.
FUNCTUS OFFICIO RULE
The term functus officio is a latin phrase meaning that having discharged a
duty/authority to act further is exhausted. In relation to court proceedings it
means that once court has finally determined a case, it has no powers to
adjudicate upon it again. When a court has determined a case by passing
sentence, following a plea of guilty it is functus officio so that even if the
accused wishes to change his plea, the court will have no power to permit him
to do so.
In Lapi and others v Uganda, a magistrate convicted the three appellants and
sentenced each one of them to 7 years imprisonment. Immediately thereafter,
two of them insulted the magistrate who thereupon enhanced their sentences,
each to 7 years and a half imprisonment. On appeal, it was held that as soon
as the magistrate convicted and sentenced the appellants, he had become
functus officio and therefore had no jurisdiction to alter either the sentence or
the conviction.
In Uganda v Micheal Ogwang
Okello J stated that it is trite law that until it passed sentence, a trial court was
not functus officio in a case. It could properly permit a plea of guilty in
substitution of a plea of not guilty.
In r v thomus here the man who had wounded his wifw raised the deffence of
previous conviction but it never succeded
In the case of daudji it was obswevwd it is not that the facts that the accused
is convicted with are the same but the offence is the one that is the same.
In the case of Adan it is basically on the procedure in the magistrate courts.
In patel’s case aplea of guilty can not be retracted after passing sentence.

PLEAS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PLEAS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PLEAS

A plea is an answer to a charge. It may be an admission or a denial to a

The possible pleas are;

PLEA OF GUILTY TO A LESSER OFFENCE

PLEAS OF AUTREFOIS ACQUIT OR AUTRE FOIS CONVICT

These two pleas- meaning previously acquitted and previously convicted

s.93(a) MCA provides that a previous conviction or acquittal can be proved by

A PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION

A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY.

According to this case, when an accused person is charged with an offence,

FUNCTUS OFFICIO RULE

In Uganda v Micheal Ogwang

In the case of Adan it is basically on the procedure in the magistrate courts.

You might also like