UBUSHINJACYAHA v NISHYIREMBERE

UBUSHINJACYAHA v NISHYIREMBERE

The court found that the appellant knowingly transported a large quantity of cannabis, and his explanations were inconsistent with the evidence and his prior admissions. The amount and circumstances indicated intent to traffic, not mere possession. The late submission by defense counsel seeking acquittal was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RPAA 00039/2025/CA
Parties
Prosecution: Ubushinjacyaha; Appellant: Nishyirembere Jean-Baptiste
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
29 December 2025
Case Number
RPAA 00039/2025/CA
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Drug Trafficking, Possession of Narcotics, Appeal Procedure, Sentencing
Source Language
rw
Criminal Law Drug Trafficking Possession of Narcotics Appeal Procedure Sentencing

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ubushinjacyaha

Prosecution

Nishyirembere Jean-Baptiste

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appellant should be convicted of drug trafficking or simple possession
  2. 2 Whether late submissions by defense counsel should be admitted

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant knowingly transported a large quantity of cannabis, and his explanations were inconsistent with the evidence and his prior admissions. The amount and circumstances indicated intent to traffic, not mere possession. The late submission by defense counsel seeking acquittal was inadmissible as it was not filed within the statutory period and did not supplement the original grounds of appeal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal of Nishyirembere Jean-Baptiste is dismissed as unfounded.
  • The judgment of the High Court (RPA 00199/2023/HC/KIG) is upheld.