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

Flynote

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.

---