yusufu msangi vs republic 1987 tzca 47 17 september 1987

o? Tnr^/iiii- 1-1r AhUGIIh ^^ -o 1 a vj 9i’-» Q'l-Aii ^ I-^SIC-J*-^'i^t.-^-*^ csikin/x a p f ^ jl no. 86 cii' i;c6 „ vJ O iJi' J" I .O ./_.I r O T j L • « • • « • * • J:~--X ■■" -'h/--'. 'l.-i-'-., *7Ey;.3U.7i rrv’-T-^N •-> t 'T'.- i— r T ■V'-i ; " 7 ' " ' ' r'-'V fv7 T'T' S. J. -h-l> wi/-i. l J — ->J — # • * • # • • • • -i- .- -> I-V -L v. A : ._■*— j --- (Appeal fro:.: tliG conv:.ction of the High Court of ia::zania at Aruslia) (Ch.ua, J.) dated the l^-'-th day of hay, 1y86 in Criminal /-ppea.1 ITo, kO of 1.5jC6 _ jupsriDiTT g j ? t z :x coieyt 0i;iJIA J ..... ; The appellant was charged before the --eoideht Kagistrate* s Court in A.ruc2ia. of attsiv.pted robhery contrary to sections 207 and 321 of the Penal Code. It is the prosecution case that on 3«12.22 at 11 a.n. appellant and his colleague attempted to steal a notor vehicle driven by P ."T. 1 i.c.ta.ta Canoti. AppeXlant and his colleague jumped into this no torvehicle as it was being parhed and ordered ?.~T.1 the driver at gun point to drive on. P.br.1 drove on as ordered and when he caw a 'police not or vehicle coring frovv the opposite direction lie stop ed infront of it and jui. pad out and ran J tne two robbers inside the vehicle also jumped out and ran. -ne police chase but one of the robbers managed to escape. '^he police however were directed by P.'f.k who saw the appellant running to a certain house and entering it. The police approached this house whereupon the appellant dashed out and. ran and was soon apprehended by people nearby. Appellant was found guilty of the offence of attempted robbery of the vehicle and. sentenced to C years irnprioonrrient. his appeal to the high Court was dismissed. He now a peals to this Court on a purported point of law. t'r. 1-wale, Counsel for the appellant argues that the first appellate court failed in applying principles of law relating to visual identification* ___ /2. - 2 - -ie ci'cec, cases wn:to. stran.^'©x1 i'-. s. bac. j<z.s no :: £. tooc. iCieni/xi. ication. Obviously tlis cases cited were at va.ric.ncq witl of this case and therefore couli not help liis client one bit. i..p:ellant was identified by the driver of the vehicle -5/ho sat beside hi:::, in broad day light and also by mr.£n vho hnew a "pellar-t long before that day. P •J #2 , a -;oIice nan in the no lice vehicle which stopped, who also hnew the appellant, saw hin. fhe question cf the identity of the appellant was resolved in the counts below and this was an. issue of fact. ■Js are concerned at this stape only with questions of law, and we can discern no such question of law in this appeal « 'Je accordingly disnios this appeal in its entirety, DhTSD at hlLUSIiL this 17 th day of ^eptenber, 1>0r/ •