Brief: Mujurizi Gerald v. Uganda

Share With Your Friends

Save Article to Read Later
Close

No account yet? Register


Date of Judgement: 7th June, 2024

Court: Court of Appeal

Case Number:  (Criminal Appeal 342 of 2016) [2024]

Judge (s): Justices; Muzamiru Mutangula Kibeedi, Christopher Gashirabake, Oscar John Kihika.

Main Topic (s): Sentence Arising out of Plea Bargain

————

Join the Exclusive LegalReports Whatsapp Channel. Click Here

————-

Summary Facts of the Case

The appellant, Mujurizi Gerald, was convicted of Murder and Aggravated Robbery by the High Court based on his plea of guilt obtained under the plea bargain process and was sentenced to 20 years in prison under the Plea Bargain Agreement (PBA) with the prosecution.

He appealed to the Court of Appeal challenging the validity and fairness of the sentence on the grounds that; the High Court Judge had not indicated on the record of the court proceedings whether the appellant, an illiterate person had understood the plea bargain process and that the sentence was harsh and excessive.


Justice Christopher Gashirabake
Justice Christopher Gashirabake/The Independent

The decision of the Court

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and upheld the sentence of 20 years imprisonment as imposed by the High Court.

The appellate court found no miscarriage of justice in the plea bargaining process and determined that the trial judge had acted within legal bounds.

The learned Justices examined the evidence on record finding that the Plea Bargain Agreement had been reached in the presence of an interpreter/translator although the High Court Judge did not indicate so on the record of the court proceedings.

They reasoned that such a minor imperfection can not be sufficient ground for overturning the sentence.

Secondly, the learned Justices of Appeal regarding the alleged harshness of the sentence, ruled that the High Court has no power to change a Convict’s sentence (except for good reason) that has been reached freely under a Plea Bargain Agreement.

The Judges reasoned this was intended to give efficacy to the plea bargain process in the criminal justice system.

Key Quote: “The sentencing mandate of the trial Court in convictions arising from [a Plea Bargain Agreement (PBA)] is limited by the law to sentencing the convict as agreed in the PBA or rejecting it completely where the trial court is satisfied that it is illegal or may occasion a miscarriage of justice. The trial court does not have the power to sentence an accused person outside the PBA and if it does so, that becomes sufficient ground for the appellate court to set aside the sentence.” – Court of Appeal


Justice Muzamiru Kibeedi/Courtesy Photo

Counsel on Record

For the Appellant: Mr. Felix Bakanyebonera (on State Brief)

For the Respondent: Ms. Fatinah Nakafero (Chief State Attorney, DPP)

Law Applied By the Court

  • Rule 12(1)(g) of the Judicature (Plea Bargain) Rules 2016: The trial court does not have power to sentence an accused person outside the PBA.
  • Lwere Bosco Vs Uganda, Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 531 of 2016: Court’s dealing with complaints on appeal based on the severity of a sentence made by the trial court under a PBA freely entered by the parties

Conclusion

This judgment upholds the binding nature of plea agreements and the limited scope of judicial intervention post-agreement unless clear evidence of illegality or injustice is presented.

Key Quote: ” Severity of the sentence as a ground of appeal cannot arise out of plea bargain proceedings because parties negotiate and agree voluntarily. A convict cannot later change his mind on appeal faulting the trial judge whose discretion in the plea bargain proceedings is limited to confirming a sentence voluntarily initiated and agreed to by the parties to the agreement. The Appellant cannot turn around and argue that the sentence so approved was harsh and excessive for non-consideration of mitigating factors because these factors are part of the negotiation… Allowing convicts to appeal against sentences they freely and voluntarily agreed in the first place without good reason would in our view undermine the relevancy and objectives of plea bargaining in our criminal Justice system” – Court of Appeal in Lwera Bosco V. Uganda (cited above).

Case Download Link



Share With Your Friends

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Content is protected !!