Kizito Enock v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 288 of 2014) [2018] UGCA 53 (30 July 2018)

Flynote

Criminal law

Case summary

On the circumstantial evidence court held that the evidence on record does not disclose any unreliability as the appellant’s story is inconsistent. On the conviction of manslaughter court held that this was prematurely done at a wrong stage of trial and the trial judge erred in holding that the ingredient of malice aforethought had not been proved by prosecution but the conviction is maintained as there is no cross-appeal. On sentencing court held that the term of 23 years was harsh and out of rage.

---