PROSECUTION v. MUKANTAGARA ET AL

The Court held that since Fayirara knew of the invoice's existence during the trial and failed to produce it or provide a conclusive reason for not doing so, the invoice does not qualify as new evidence under article 180 of the code of criminal procedure. Therefore, the application for review is inadmissible.

Citation: RLR V.2 - 2014
Parties: Applicant: Prosecution; Respondent: Ananias Fayirara
Court: Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Rwanda
Judgment Date: 15 November 2013
Case Number: RPA0196/11/CS
Procedural Posture: Criminal Review Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal Against Screening Order on Review Application
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; screening order upheld
Legal Topics: Review of Criminal Judgments, New Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence
Source Language: en

Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Review of Criminal Judgments New Evidence Admissibility of Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Prosecution

Applicant

Ananias Fayirara

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Review Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal Against Screening Order on Review Application

Legal Issues

1 Whether the invoice produced by Fayirara after the final judgment constitutes new evidence justifying review of the conviction

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; screening order upheld

Orders

Fayirara Ananias's appeal against the case screening order no RP 0410/09/Pré-ex/CS of 26/10/2009 is dismissed for lack of merit.
Screening order no RP 0410/09/Pré-ex/CS of 26/10/2009 is upheld.