19821206 TZHC Tabora
The conviction was upheld because the prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness identification and corroborative testimony from a co-accused, was found credible and overwhelming. The appellant's alibi was properly considered and rejected. The sentence was confirmed as appropriate given the circumstances.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19821206 TZHC Tabora
- Parties
- Appellant: Amani Selemani; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 6 December 1982
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Unlawful Possession of Government Trophy, Burden of Proof, Alibi, Corroborative Evidence, Sentencing
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Amani Selemani
Appellant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for unlawful possession of government trophy was proper
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was appropriate
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction was upheld because the prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness identification and corroborative testimony from a co-accused, was found credible and overwhelming. The appellant's alibi was properly considered and rejected. The sentence was confirmed as appropriate given the circumstances.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- conviction confirmed
- sentence of 4.5 years imprisonment confirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
• .. . IN THE HIGH COUPT OF TANZANIA Arl TABORA., APPLLANT JUflLPICTION (TabOrz, Legistry) '. •. • (HC) CRIHINAL A?AL No. 17 OF 1979 ORGI/I CFIPZNIJ CASE NO0 315 OF 1978 OF THE D±IICT COUT OF KIG(Th1 DISTRICT M K(OM .ebre Mihayo 1 agistrat' AMANI SELEMANI • •• • 0 0 10.1 ••••• . ..... . . . . . . . 0 APPEI LANT vers 1 Us THE REPUBLIC oo....o •o.o..o.o..*..o..... ooe.. RESPONDENT -- . •';' •., •, ...... '- fr, . - •, ,. .... CHARGE Unlawful possession of GovcrIment trophy c/ 67(1)(2)-4a) of the Wildlife AcN i'v:. '•-. • , .. . JUDc1.ENT RUAMA, 3.: . . . AMANI: SFIL'EMANI was charcled.W-i.th and convicted if , being in • unlawful .pssess.op of Govemëñt trophy contrary to section 67(1)(2)(a) of;the Wildlife Co:arvation Act No. 12'34. He was entenced to 4½ years.i icnner't. . He. 3ppea1s aq.nst•' both the convictior and sentence. .. . .. pe facts of this case are simple. Th appe ant was -, . .....) - d'ught by the police carryinq a box ?it the igoma r ilwáy Station on'7/1O/73. He was asked to open it but said thatheha no keys, the.1<eys were with its owner whoWas still behird. He'ws given an opportunity to go and look fo. the key; he never retuned to the place where the poLice wre waitihg for him. The held box was opened and inside it were und three pieces of elephant tusks. The apbellant.s traced to :h1s home town and arrested. The information on his wher.eab:uts was given by a co—accused whom he court found was a mere porter of the appellant and hence acquitted 0 The acquitted cb—accused had been car±ying a box Inside which were also elephant tusks. The appellant's defence wasari alibi. He detailed his movements leaving it clear that he was. on .7/10/78 nowhere near the Kigoma Railway Station. ........ .. The trial magistrate closely examined the evidence and properly referred himself on the burden of proof generally and the law applicable when an alibi israised., He rejected the alibi of the appellant. He had earlier on considered the prosecution case and found it weighty. He had properly rnentioned that the ....../2. - 2 - S T. case dependcd on the crc1ibibtv of the witnesses The arrests were done on the day light. ThP police officer who had questioned the appellant at the Pai14y Staton had time to observe the appellant and talk to him. Therc is no question ofrnstaken identity. I am fortified 1b this finding ]ke the tri31 maqstrate by the ..... rrbÔrativë , the di - : Yrhis person had mn1 th€. statret thE m'rtent he was dbnfdzted by bthe police at ic 1a 1ww station. He rEpeated the sane story In court, ite had ven he police the name nd address of the appellant - it -s corEdt in,fornotion. on arrest, the police Pfflcer identified the appei1ant as the pson who h3d sid-he • was in for ;thék of t box h.e \ias. fo:ud ar g on 7/10/78 but newertoretn, The c•oaccised.'s evidrie was used by the trial court s corrpborative vdence aqainst the appellant This evidence was on top•.of.&n•lready very strong eiidence.aainst • the appeilarit. In consi.dei.hg this 1 realise it is a co—accUsed evidsncc s to h tal en with caution. The appellant acbnded hecuse of th fact that he .knew1..what.he hadin the bthd t.;t\S:is...;. •. :. Th ev1denc nqainst the appe'1i is ovewhelthq. I am eVen. surprised that p 1. drii t.téd. hearing ; it should have been d18r,issd mary1 0 I noW d]smlss the .1a , peal agsiriic.tior. . ..•• •.. • ......... The appellnt we's sentenced to4 yers imprisonment, sentence .,. ,. ,- .-.-.• -. ....... subject tó-bfirrnatioh. b' this 1ié trial ñaisrate properly addressed himself when inpos&4the sentence. The stiff sentenc. iS nore 'u3 dservcd in ltho Circumstances. I hreby confirm it. The appeal against señ1ence is also dismissed. ................................................-. . ........... S'. .. :: -& .. \.• \.•. .• •..................... .. r.... ............... . ..,. .: '(. ....... :. •. :. • ..: i}iA PUAiA 4 . .. ...... --.........•I.•,... J1JDGE •• . .•. . , . .. . .. -. .y..,. .' .-..... . . .. • 2 ' •............... .: . : Ce:1a, ge. "Hr Shaidi, State Attorney fdr-1i pili' - * Appellant - -absent . --......................... 4 j fl .. .d:CTiéred : ...... ' r •. :-:. .- •• • r TABORA •-. . . • YAHYA RUBA'MA. 6th DeCember, 1982. JUDGE