Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Rwanda decisions
Source-linked decisions currently available to browse
The appellate court found that the evidence, including witness testimony and the defendant's own signed seizure report, established that Maniriho Samuel possessed 36 packets of cannabis for the purpose of sale, not personal consumption. The court held that the High Court did not err in convicting him for drug trafficking, and the conviction and sentence should stand.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that Bazizane Rosette could not receive further sentence reduction after already receiving the statutory minimum for drug trafficking.
The Court of Appeal held that Iragena Josiane’s reduced sentence for cannabis trafficking was already the statutory minimum and could not be lowered further.
The Court of Appeal held that first-time admission of guilt on appeal does not justify further sentence reduction where the lower courts already mitigated the penalty.
The Court of Appeal held that only the prosecution may seek criminal penalties in a private prosecution appeal, so the High Court lacked power to convict and sentence. Damages were upheld.
The evidence, including admissions and physical exhibits, established that Nteziyaremye Fidèle engaged in both possession and trafficking of a large quantity of cannabis, justifying the offence classification and sentence. Both appellants already received the minimum sentence permitted by law after mitigation; further reduction is legally impermissible.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that, even if the value of the property was not previously litigated, the ascertainable value of the auctioned property (shares) must be used to determine the court's jurisdiction for a second appeal. Since the value exceeded 50,000,000 Frw, the High Court, Nyanza Chamber, had jurisdiction to hear the second appeal by Daba Suppliers Ltd.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that late appeal grounds are inadmissible, upheld the conviction, and maintained the 20-year sentence for rape of a minor.
Appeal grounds submitted by applicant were not accepted as they were filed after the statutory deadline, and no valid justification was provided for the delay; therefore, prior judgment and sentence remain unchanged.
Source excerpt
The appeal grounds submitted by Ntaganzwa Alphonse were filed well beyond the statutory 30-day period after the judgment copy was made available, without a legally valid justification. Therefore, the grounds are inadmissible and the prior conviction and sentence remain in force.
Source excerpt
Explore more
