Bukenya v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 1990) [1990] UGHCCRD 3 (13 August 1990)

Flynote

Criminal law|Evidence Law

Case summary

He appealed on three grounds. Firstly, that his plea did not amount to plea of guilty to the offence of theft. Secondly, he argued that his age had not been taken into account when sentencing him and thirdly, that the sentence of 15 months in prison was harsh and excessive. The trial judge held that the guilty plea had been proper as the accused had agreed to correctness of the facts put to him in support of the contention that he committed the offence. He also held that the age of the appellant had in fact been considered as the accused had himself told the trial court that he was 19 years old and his charge sheet also indicated that he had been 18 years old at the time of his arrest. The affidavit sworn by the appellant’s mother in support of this ground was discredited as, according to the court, it had been sworn as an afterthought to ‘save’ the appellant. The court however held that the trial magistrate had omitted to consider several factors when sentencing the accused, and that these omissions made the sentence harsh and excessive because had they been considered, the sentence would have been lesser. The factors not taken into account by the trial magistrate were; the fact that the appellant was a first-time offender, the fact that he had pleaded guilty and thus saved the court’s time and the question of whether the stolen property had been recovered or not. Consequently, the appellant’s conviction was upheld but his sentence was varied from 15 months to 4 months in prison.

---