armand guehi vs republic 2023 tzca 17575 31 august 2023

armand guehi vs republic 2023 tzca 17575 31 august 2023

The applicant failed to demonstrate denial of the right to be heard, manifest error, fraud, or jurisdictional defect. The grounds raised amounted to an attempt to reargue the merits of the appeal, which is not permissible in review. The conviction and sentence were lawfully imposed after thorough evaluation of evidence by both trial and appellate courts.

Citation
armand guehi vs republic 2023 tzca 17575 31 august 2023
Parties
Applicant: Armand Guehi; Respondent: The Republic
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
31 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Review / Ruling on Application for Review
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Right to Be Heard, Manifest Error, Nullity of Decision, Review of Appellate Judgment, Death Penalty
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Appellate Procedure Right to Be Heard Manifest Error Nullity of Decision Review of Appellate Judgment Death Penalty

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Armand Guehi

Applicant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application for Review / Ruling on Application for Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was denied the right to be heard on email evidence
  2. 2 Whether there was a manifest error apparent on the face of the record
  3. 3 Whether the decision was a nullity due to alleged unconstitutionality of the death sentence

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate denial of the right to be heard, manifest error, fraud, or jurisdictional defect. The grounds raised amounted to an attempt to reargue the merits of the appeal, which is not permissible in review. The conviction and sentence were lawfully imposed after thorough evaluation of evidence by both trial and appellate courts.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • No review granted
  • Judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 242 of 2010 stands