Judgment[1992] KECA 57
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Court had analysed this evidence in depth, they would most probably have come to the same conclusion as we have. As a result of this, we consider the convictions of these three appellants to be unsafe and should not be allowed to stand.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
statement made by the appellant to the police and which he gave to the court for perusal.At the conclusion of Mr Chunga’s outline of the facts the appellant then said:- “I agree all the facts.” He was then convicted of the offence and later sentenced to 5 years imprisonment. In passing sentence the learned Chief Magistrate stated that he had taken into consideration what the appellant had stated in mitigation as well as the contents of the appellant’s statement made to the police.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
conviction set aside and order that each be released forthwith unless otherwise, lawfully held. As for Julius Omando who confessed on oath to having stolen the complainant’s clothes, I direct that he be investigated further.