Sumbu Vs Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2017) [2019] UGCA 12 (11 March 2019)

Criminal law|Evidence Law|Evaluation of Evidence
Case summary
The court noted that they were aware of their role as the first appellate court and how they were supposed to re appraise the evidence and reach an independent decision. That since the monies were drawn from a bank in Arua, the court had jurisdiction. That having admitted to have stolen the money, he was rightly convicted. That there was sufficient direct and circumstantial evidence to pin the appellant.

Loading PDF...

This document is 1015.3 KB. Do you want to load it?

▲ To the top