Kwebiha Robert v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 77 of 2019)

Observed later treatment

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

Holding

The Court of Appeal, re-evaluating the evidence as first appellate court, held the murder conviction was sound: the deceased's dying declaration identifying the Appellant as his assailant was well corroborated by the testimonies of PW2, PW3 and PW4, and identification conditions (electricity, prior acquaintance) were favourable. Although the trial court's failure to record the plea was an anomaly under Adan v R, it caused no miscarriage of justice because the represented Appellant underwent a full trial and raised no objection (Trial on Indictments Act s.139). The trial Judge had considered the Appellant's defence, and the 35-year sentence disclosed no illegality and was appropriate given murder's maximum penalty. The appeal was dismissed.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; conviction and 35-year sentence (29 years to serve after remand deduction) upheld

Facts

On 15 December 2012 at Kijumbura Village, Masindi District, the Appellant was hired as a disc jockey at a pre-wedding ceremony. The deceased, Murungi Uzaiph, and his team, including his sister Mbabazi Shakira (PW2) and nephew Byaruhanga Muhamud (PW3), were hired to prepare and serve food. In the early hours of 16 December 2012, around 2.00 am, the Appellant stepped on PW2 as she slept. The deceased intervened and an altercation ensued. The fight was broken up, but the Appellant returned, resumed the fight and stabbed the deceased. The deceased told PW3 and a police officer that the Appellant had stabbed him. The Appellant was detained by a mob and taken to police. The deceased was taken to hospital where he died a few hours later. There was electricity at the scene, and PW2 had known the Appellant for five years as her brother-in-law.

Issues

1. Whether the conviction for murder was sustainable on uncorroborated circumstantial evidence.
2. Whether the trial Judge erred in the manner he conducted the plea-taking of the Appellant.
3. Whether the trial Judge wrongly disregarded the Appellant's defence.
4. Whether the sentence of 35 years' imprisonment was manifestly harsh and excessive.

Orders

• The appeal is dismissed.
• The Appellant shall serve his sentence on the terms handed down by the trial Judge.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (5)

• Penal Code Act Cap. 120 s.188
• Penal Code Act Cap. 120 s.189
• Trial on Indictments Act s.139
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions Rule 30(1)
• Sentencing Guidelines, Third Schedule

Cases cited (14)

• Abdul Hameed Saif v Ali Mohamed Sholan [1955] 22 EACA 270
• Kifamunte Henry v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997)
• Namara Daphine v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 030 of 2013)
• Bogere Moses & Anor v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 1997)
• Rwabugambe Moses v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 2014)
• Akbar Hussein Godi v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 03 of 2013)
• Simon Musoke v R [1958] EA 715
• Janet Mureeba & 2 Others v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2003)
• Ayebare Eric v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 157 of 2018)
• Adan v R [1973] EA 445
• Kyalimpa Edward v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1995)
• R v De Haviland (1983) 5 Cr App R(S) 109
• Ogalo s/o Owoura v R (1954) 21 EACA 270
• R v Mohammed Janal (1948) 15 EACA 126

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Bamutura v Uganda [2020] UGSC 2

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.