maneno shomari vs republic 1987 tzhc 103 8 may 1987
The appellant was found in possession of stolen property soon after the theft and failed to provide a credible explanation, justifying the conviction and sentence.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- maneno shomari vs republic 1987 tzhc 103 8 may 1987
- Parties
- Appellant: Maheno Shomari; Respondent: The United Republic
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 8 May 1987
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Burglary, Stealing, Possession of Stolen Property, Criminal Appeals
- 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
Maheno Shomari
Appellant
The United Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for burglary and stealing was supported by evidence
- 2 Whether the appellant's explanation for possession of stolen property was credible
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant was found in possession of stolen property soon after the theft and failed to provide a credible explanation, justifying the conviction and sentence.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- conviction and sentence affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OP TANZANIA AT M R M - J. »' " l < ........ .... SALAAM .. ^l^,," APPELLATE JURISDICTION HIGH COURT CRIMEA! AEEBAL NQ« 76 OP 198,4 ORIGINAL CRIMINAL CASE NO. 521 OP 1983 OP THE DISTRICT COURT OP MOEDGORO DISTRICT AT MOROGORO,Before G. KHALID Esq* District Magistrate* MAHENO SHOMARI. ................. APPELLANT versus THE UNITED REPUBLIC f . ••• RESPONDENT J U D GM E N T MAINA. J. The appellant was convicted by the district court at Morogoro oJ *! burglary and stealing* He was sentenced to three years imprisonment in the first count and two years imprisonment in the second count, to run concurrently. The complainant’s house was broken into on the night of 7/12/1982 and various properties valued at about shs*12,045*70 were stolen from therein* Police were notified* On 7*9.1983 the oomplainant saw Pw4 Mariam Rashid wearing a skirt which was one of the properties stolen from the complainant1s house. Mariam said he received the skirt from a friend, Pw2 Tukae Shomari who told the court that she was £Lven the skirt and other clothes by the appellant. In his evidence the appellant said that he had bought those clothes from people whom he did not name and he called no witnesses. The petition of appeal is a repetition of what the appellant told ft . the trial court. Like the lower court, I am sa^sfied that the appellant was found in possession of the stolen properties and his allegation that he bought them was properly rejected* The complainant identified the properties and if the appellant had bought them he.would have called even a single witness* The conviction is supported by the evidence on record and the sentences are in accordance with the law* The appeal is dismissed in its entirety, W.J. HAIHA JUDGE DAR ES SALUM 8Th Ifey, 1987.