Justus Mwesigye v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 1989)
Legal issues
About this case
AI-generated summary — verify against the full judgment before relying on it.
Held that recent unexplained possession of stolen property supports an inference of theft, and a second appeal cannot disturb concurrent findings of fact absent an error of law.
Ask Wakilii about this case
Get a cited answer on how Justus Mwesigye applies to your facts, grounded in Ugandan statutes and case law.
Research this case →
Source: this page presents Wakilii's issue analysis and metadata for a
publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Judgment text is sourced from the
Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org).
Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.