|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| April 2011 |
|
|
Appeal allowed where visual identification and identification parade were unreliable and convictions therefore unsafe.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification at scene and identification parade – Compliance with Police General Order 232 and SSENTALE guidelines – Requirement that witnesses do not see or be seen by accused before parade – Failure to call parade witnesses diminishes probative value – Cautionary approach (WAZIRI AMANI).
|
29 April 2011 |
|
A ruling delivered without hearing or requisite written submissions is invalid and must be set aside; rehearing ordered.
* Civil procedure – court-ordered written submissions – where parties fail to file submissions the Court should set matter for hearing and notify parties. * Ruling delivered without hearing or required materials – invalid and liable to be quashed. * No costs where error attributable to the Court.
|
19 April 2011 |
|
DNA is not conclusive alone, but when coupled with recovered items and the accused's lies, circumstantial conviction was upheld.
* Criminal law – murder – recovery of blood-stained clothing and cap from accused’s premises – DNA profiling linking items to deceased and accused.
* Evidence – expert evidence (DNA) – expert opinion not conclusive; need for random match statistics; caution against prosecutor’s fallacy.
* Criminal procedure – summing-up to assessors – omission of express reference to police statements not necessarily fatal if substance conveyed.
* Circumstantial evidence – accused’s lies and inconsistent explanations may corroborate prosecution case.
|
18 April 2011 |
|
Court affirmed murder convictions on cogent circumstantial evidence but set aside death sentence for under‑18 appellant.
Criminal law — admission of extra-judicial/confessional statements — trial-within-a-trial procedure and presence of assessors; unsigned cautioned statement — lack of signature undermines voluntariness; circumstantial evidence — requirements for conviction (Sharad principles) and recent unexplained possession of stolen property; sentencing — death penalty not permissible where accused was under eighteen at time of offence (s.26(2) Penal Code).
|
13 April 2011 |
|
Armed robbery conviction quashed because identification was unsafe due to dark conditions and inconsistent testimony.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Reliability where assault occurred in darkness – Identification inconsistencies; PF3 admissibility (s.240(3) CPA) and right to cross-examination noted but not decided.
|
8 April 2011 |
|
Credible child testimony and corroboration upheld conviction for unnatural offence; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence (s.154 Penal Code) – Child victim – Voir dire and testimony of child of tender years – Corroboration by witnesses – PF3 and cautioned statement expunged – Appeal dismissed.
|
8 April 2011 |
|
A conviction entered in absentia without a post-arrest hearing was procedurally invalid; proceedings quashed and matter remitted.
Criminal procedure – Conviction in absentia – Section 227 Criminal Procedure Act – Right to be heard upon arrest after in-absentia conviction – Validity of first appeal where there is unexplained delay – Revisional powers under section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
|
8 April 2011 |
|
Convictions quashed because visual identification and the identification parade were irregular and evidence was unsafe.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification at scene and identification parade – Compliance with Police General Order 232 and SSENTALE/Waziri Amani guidelines – mixing of witnesses and suspects undermining parade’s probative value.
* Criminal procedure – Duty of courts to consider defence case and avoid misdirection by ignoring contested factual allegations.
* Appeal – Conviction unsafe where identification process irregular and evidence of identification is doubtful.
|
8 April 2011 |
|
Contradictions and credibility defects in prosecution evidence rendered the armed robbery conviction unsafe; appeal allowed and conviction quashed.
Criminal law – armed robbery – sufficiency of evidence – contradictions and credibility of prosecution witnesses – second appeal interference where misdirections or non-directions on evidence – absence of corroborative physical evidence.
|
8 April 2011 |
|
Conviction quashed where material contradictions and unreliable identification undermined prosecution's armed robbery case.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – sufficiency of evidence – contradictions in witness accounts on identification, number of weapons and location of shooting – credibility of witness (guest-house attendant) – appellate interference with concurrent factual findings where material misdirections/non-directions exist.
|
8 April 2011 |
|
|
8 April 2011 |
|
Conviction for armed robbery quashed where material contradictions in prosecution evidence rendered the trial outcome unsafe.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Sufficiency and coherence of prosecution evidence – Contradictions between witnesses on number of weapons, location of shooting and identification – Alibi – Second appeal interference with concurrent findings where record shows misdirections or unsafe conviction.
|
8 April 2011 |
|
Appeal allowed: identification and proof of penetration were insufficient to support rape and related convictions.
Criminal law – visual identification – Waziri Amani standard – insufficiency where lighting and observation particulars not given; Criminal law – proof of penetration in rape and unnatural offences – complainant’s general assertion inadequate under s.131(4); Corroboration – failure to call an identified independent witness weakens prosecution case; Medical evidence – injuries do not substitute for proof of penetration.
|
8 April 2011 |
|
Insufficient identification evidence in a daylight snatch required quashing the robbery conviction and release of the appellant.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Sufficiency of visual identification in robbery cases – Need for particulars (attire, physical features, time and distance) – Benefit of doubt and acquittal where identification is unreliable.
|
8 April 2011 |
|
Court upheld conviction and life sentence for sodomy of a seven-year-old, finding the child's testimony credible and corroborated.
* Criminal law – Unnatural offence (sodomy) involving a child of tender years – admissibility and weight of child's testimony; corroboration by witnesses and physical signs.
* Evidence – PF3 and cautioned statement expunged; inadmissible for conviction.
* Evidence Act s.127(7) – no mandatory warning required before convicting on credible testimony of a child of tender years.
* Sentencing – High Court substituted life imprisonment; conviction and sentence upheld on appeal.
|
7 April 2011 |
|
Convictions quashed where visual identification and identification parade procedures were flawed and unreliable.
Criminal law – identification evidence – visual identification at scene; identification parade – compliance with Police General Order 232 and SSENTALE rule that witnesses must not see accused before parade; probative value of parade evidence; duty to consider defence challenge to parade; unsafe conviction where identification evidence doubtful.
|
7 April 2011 |
|
Convictions quashed for unsafe visual identification and failure to prove penetration.
Criminal law – Sexual offences – Visual identification – inadequate description of lighting and failure to call independent witness renders identification unsafe; Proof of penetration – general assertions insufficient under s.131(4) Penal Code and relevant authorities; Medical injuries alone do not prove penetration; Convictions unsustainable where identification and penetration are unproven.
|
7 April 2011 |
|
Fleeting, undetailed eyewitness identification was insufficient to support a robbery conviction; conviction quashed and release ordered.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — Eyewitness must give sufficient particulars (attire, physical features, distance, duration) for safe identification; fleeting glance and lack of detail may give rise to reasonable doubt — Benefit of doubt — Conviction quashed where identification unreliable.
|
7 April 2011 |
|
Conviction for rape upheld though medical report expunged; 30-year sentence illegal for an 18-year-old, substituted and appellant released.
* Criminal law – Rape – proof of penetration required by s.130(4) Penal Code – can be proved by complainant’s testimony and accused’s admission even if medical report expunged.
* Evidence – Medical report admitted without compliance with s.240(3) Criminal Procedure Act is inadmissible and must be expunged.
* Evidence – credibility of witnesses – trial and first appellate courts’ credibility findings accorded deference.
* Sentencing – offender aged eighteen or less (first offender) subject to corporal punishment under s.131(2) Penal Code; custodial sentence unlawful.
|
7 April 2011 |
|
|
7 April 2011 |
|
Appeal against conviction based on an unequivocal guilty plea is barred; appeal dismissed and statutory minimum sentence upheld.
Criminal procedure – Guilty plea – Appeal barred by section 360(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act where plea and facts are unequivocal; equivocation; statutory minimum sentence; medical examination of child victim not determinative once plea admits conduct.
|
7 April 2011 |
|
Appeal dismissed: complainant credible, charge omission cured, consent irrelevant for under‑18 victim.
Criminal law – Rape – consent immaterial where victim under 18 (s130(2)(e)) – Defective charge cured by s388(1) CPA – Complainant credibility despite prior mental illness – Reporting delay and contradictions assessed as non‑fatal – Penetration sufficient under s130(4)(a) – Appellate restraint on re‑evaluating facts.
|
6 April 2011 |
|
Complainant’s coherent testimony and s130(2)(e) rendered consent immaterial; appeal against rape conviction dismissed.
Criminal law – Rape – Particulars of charge – omission of consent element cured where complainant under 18 (s130(2)(e)) and accused knew nature of charge (s388(1) CPA); Credibility – complainant with prior mental illness may be credible if testimony is coherent, consistent and corroborated; Delay in reporting – unexplained delay is a factor but may be excused by threats; Appellate review – appellate court will not readily disturb findings of fact and credibility.
|
6 April 2011 |
|
Delay excused where High Court judgment was delivered in absentia without notice; leave to appeal under Part X is unnecessary.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to file Notice of Appeal – sufficient cause where High Court judgment delivered in absentia and no notification; Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.6(7)(a) – appeals from High Court under Part X of the Criminal Procedure Act lie to the Court of Appeal on points of law; leave to appeal not required.
|
6 April 2011 |
|
Appellant’s rape conviction upheld; victim’s testimony and corroboration proved penetration despite expunging one witness.
* Criminal law – Rape – Sufficiency of evidence – Victim’s testimony corroborated by other witnesses and PF3 – conviction upheld.
* Criminal procedure – Evidence – Effect of expunging a witness’s evidence for lack of voire dire/cross‑examination where remaining evidence is conclusive.
* Penal Code s.130(4)(a) – Penetration however slight suffices; bleeding and account of intercourse accepted as proof.
|
6 April 2011 |
|
Improperly admitted PF3 was discounted, but conviction upheld based on credible complainant testimony proving rape.
* Criminal procedure – PF3 admissibility – compliance with section 240(3) Criminal Procedure Act – right to summon medical officer for cross-examination.
* Sexual offences – proof of rape – necessity of evidence of penetration and victim’s age.
* Evidence – corroboration in sexual offence trials – application of section 127(7) Law of Evidence Act; conviction may rest on credible uncorroborated victim testimony.
|
6 April 2011 |
|
Insufficient night-time identification and unexplained delay led to quashing the appellant's conviction.
Identification evidence — visual identification at night; need to specify lighting, distance, duration and attire; familiarity alone insufficient; absence of police testimony about naming and tracing suspect; unexplained delay in charging undermines prosecution; second appeal may revisit factual findings where misdirections/non-directions exist.
|
6 April 2011 |
|
Conviction quashed because visual identification and investigative omissions made the prosecution case unsafe.
Criminal law — Visual identification at night — necessity of particulars (lighting, distance, duration, attire); investigative omissions (no police evidence of report/naming, unknown place of arrest, delay in charging) undermine safety of conviction; appellate reassessment of facts where misdirections/non‑directions on critical evidence.
|
6 April 2011 |
|
Insufficiently detailed night-time identification and unexplained procedural gaps warranted quashing of conviction.
Criminal law – Visual identification – Night-time identification; adequacy of lighting, distance and duration – Familiarity insufficient alone to dispel mistaken identity; Prosecutorial omissions – failure to call police witnesses and unexplained delay in charging undermining reliability.
|
6 April 2011 |
|
Infant rape conviction upheld where medical, eyewitness and admission evidence compensated for absence of victim testimony.
* Criminal procedure – preliminary hearing v. committal proceedings – limits of section 289 CPA
* Criminal procedure – requirement to read and explain matters not in dispute (s.192 CPA) – prejudice required to vitiate proceedings
* Evidence – rape of infant – medical evidence, eyewitness observations and confession can sustain conviction absent victim testimony
|
5 April 2011 |
|
Cautioned statement taken outside statutory time and unreliable visual identification rendered the applicant's conviction unsafe.
* Criminal procedure – admissibility of cautioned statement – sections 50, 51 and 169 CPA – statement taken outside statutory custody period is inadmissible and must be expunged.
* Evidence – visual identification – identification testimony must specify conditions (light, distance, duration, prior acquaintance) to be reliable.
* Appeal – conviction unsafe where improperly admitted statement is expunged and identification is unreliable.
|
4 April 2011 |
|
Rape conviction upheld: identity and penetration proved; consent irrelevant as complainant was under eighteen; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Rape – identity proved in broad daylight; penetration established by complainant’s testimony; consent immaterial where complainant under 18 (s130(2)(e) Penal Code); admission by accused to witnesses; medical report (PF3) admissible but s240(3) Criminal Procedure Act entitles accused to summon and cross‑examine the doctor.
|
4 April 2011 |
|
Appellant's conviction quashed: cautioned statement unlawfully delayed and visual identification evidence unreliable.
* Criminal procedure – admissibility of cautioned statements – breach of ss.50 and 51 CPA (basic four-hour interview period) – exclusion under s.169 CPA.
* Evidence – visual identification – requirements (lighting, distance, duration, prior acquaintance) – application of Waziri Amani guidelines.
* Appeal – interference with concurrent findings of fact only where misdirection or unsafe conclusion shown.
|
1 April 2011 |
|
Convictions for armed robbery quashed due to unsatisfactory identification of recovered items, unlawful searches, and lack of forensic linkage.
Criminal law — Armed robbery — Identification of stolen property — Recent possession doctrine — lapse of days and nature of items — searches of premises in absence of accused — absence of ballistic/forensic linkage — scope of second appeal to re-examine factual findings.
|
1 April 2011 |
|
Appellants' convictions quashed where evidence, identification, searches and ballistic linkage were insufficient and unsafe.
Criminal law – armed robbery – sufficiency of evidence; recent possession doctrine – lapse of time and nature of goods; unlawful searches – admissibility and consequences; forensic linkage (ballistics) to weapon; scope of appellate interference on second appeal.
|
1 April 2011 |
|
The applicants' armed robbery convictions were quashed for improper searches and insufficient identification of stolen property.
Criminal law – armed robbery – sufficiency of evidence; identification of recovered property; doctrine of recent possession; legality of searches; absence of ballistic/forensic linkage.
|
1 April 2011 |