Wakilii

Rex v Odima (Criminal Appeal No. 176 of 1940)

East African Court of Appeal · [1941] EACA 99 · 1941 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from conviction for murder by H.M. Supreme Court of Kenya
Decision
Conviction for murder upheld; appeal dismissed

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

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.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the murder conviction. Intoxication is a defence only if it renders the accused incapable of forming the intention to kill or cause grievous harm, which was not established on the facts. On provocation, the test is whether an ordinary sober person of the appellant's class would have been deprived of self-control, not whether a drunken person would have been provoked. The appellant's drunken susceptibility to insult is not a relevant criterion for assessing provocation.

Outcome

Conviction for murder upheld; appeal dismissed

Facts

The appellant and the deceased were engaged in a discussion about handing over the appellant's wife to her brother. The deceased counselled the appellant to hand her over and stated he would do so himself. The appellant resented this. The deceased left the hut and was followed by the appellant, who stabbed him. The deceased died the following day from the stab wound. The appellant had consumed a large amount of intoxicating liquor on the day of the killing. The deceased made a dying declaration identifying the appellant as his assailant. The appellant later admitted to Chief Amoth that he had stabbed the deceased with a knife.

Issues

  1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction for murder.
  2. Whether the appellant's intoxication was such as to render him incapable of forming an intention to kill or cause grievous harm.
  3. Whether provocation existed and whether the appellant's drunken condition should be considered in assessing provocation.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Murder — Intoxication as Defence — Capacity to Form Intention
Intoxication is a good and sufficient defence to murder if the accused was so intoxicated at the time of killing as to be incapable of forming an intention to kill or cause grievous harm, or of appreciating that he was using a dangerous weapon, provided the accused raises a reasonable doubt on this issue.
Murder — Provocation — Test for Provocation
On the issue of provocation, the test is whether the provocation was such as would temporarily deprive of self-control an ordinary sober person of the same class as the accused. The accused's drunken condition and consequent susceptibility to insult is not a relevant criterion.
Murder — Provocation — Drunken Belief of Imminent Assault
Where the issue of provocation depends upon whether there was anything in the conduct of the deceased, other than mere words, which caused the accused in his condition at the time of killing to believe that he was about to be assaulted by the deceased, the accused's drunken condition may be relevant to that belief.
Dying Declarations — Admissibility
A statement by a deceased person after being fatally wounded, identifying his assailant, is admissible under section 32 of the Evidence Act.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (2)

  • Rex v Thomas (173 E.R. 356)
  • Letenock (12 Cr. App. R. 221)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Odima (Criminal Appeal No. 176 of 1940) [1941] EACA 99 (1 January 1941)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.