Search court decisions

…RESPONDENT (Appeal from the High Court at Kakamega, Gicheru J) JUDGEMENT The appellant has taken two points in this appeal; the first is that the first appeal to the High Court ought not to have been dismissed summarily;…

…appeal.…

…But in reviewing the evidence by the trial court, the learned Judge on first appeal decided to give Thomas the benefit of the doubt.…

…On first appeal, the learned judge did not find that the evidence of recognition had been wrongly received, or that there has been any misdirection or non-direction with regard to their evidence.…

…But in reviewing the evidence by the trial court, the learned Judge on first appeal decided to give Thomas the benefit of the doubt.…

…On first appeal, the learned judge did not find that the evidence of recognition had been wrongly received, or that there has been any misdirection or non-direction with regard to their evidence.…

…The learned Judge thought it fit to summarily reject the first appeal under section 352(2) Criminal Procedure Code.…

…The learned Judge thought it fit to summarily reject the first appeal under section 352(2) Criminal Procedure Code.…

…The first ground of appeal that there was not sufficient evidence to sustain the conviction is a matter of law, though whether the evidence is sufficient (when there is some evidence) is a matter of fact: See R v T Mohamed…

…The task of an appellate Court on a first appeal from a conviction was discussed and settled by the decisions of the predecessor of this court in Pandya v R [1957] EA 336 and in Shantilal M Ruwala v R [1957] EA The totality…

…These matters were not dealt with by the learned judge who heard the appellant’s first appeal.…

…The appellant’s first appeal in the High Court (Patel J) was against the conviction and sentence of a fine.…

…These matters were not dealt with by the learned judge who heard the appellant’s first appeal.…

…The appellant’s first memorandum of appeal contained eleven grounds.…

…When the matter eventually came on for hearing he added to his grounds of appeal to the High Court that the learned Judge had failed to address his mind to the first petition of appeal, and the arguments advanced in support…

…The appellant’s first memorandum of appeal contained eleven grounds.…

…When the matter eventually came on for hearing he added to his grounds of appeal to the High Court that the learned Judge had failed to address his mind to the first petition of appeal, and the arguments advanced in support…

…Hestressed that some vital witnesses did not give evidence when the case washeard in 1979 before Resident Magistrate or at first appeal in 1985 in the HighCourt Eldoret. I am not hearing the Review application.…

…facts of it, we are not presently concerned with the circumstances of the offence or of the appellants’ substantive appeals from their convictions thereof, but only with their appeals from the judge’s refusal to admit their first…

…appeal out of time.…

…NO. 211 OF 2011) ************************ JUDGMENT OF THE COURT Background [1] Antony Musasha Lubanga, (the appellant) is before us in this second appeal in which he challenges the dismissal of his first appeal by the High…

…to section 8(1) of the Sexual Offences Act and sentenced him to life imprisonment in compliance with section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act. [9] Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the appellant filed a first…

…Hestressed that some vital witnesses did not give evidence when the case washeard in 1979 before Resident Magistrate or at first appeal in 1985 in the HighCourt Eldoret. I am not hearing the Review application.…

…That was confirmed by the High Court in the first appeal. In his submissions to this court Mr Ngunjiri contended that “Demand” had not been proved.…

…That disposes of the first ground of appeal.…

…That was confirmed by the High Court in the first appeal. In his submissions to this court Mr Ngunjiri contended that “Demand” had not been proved.…

…That disposes of the first ground of appeal.…

…This being a first appeal, we are duty bound to re-evaluate the evidence on record and satisfy ourselves that it supports the appellant's conviction.…