19921117 TZHC Tabora
- Citation
- 19921117 TZHC Tabora
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 17 November 1992
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZHC
- Decision
- 17 November 1992
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The appeal was dismissed because the complainant failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the property in question belonged to them. The identification of the property was insufficient, and the doctrine of recent possession could not be applied as there was no clear evidence linking the accused to the theft. The restitution order in favor of the accused was upheld as there was no basis to annul the trial magistrate's decision.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Restitution order in favor of the accused upheld
- No order as to costs
02
Material facts
Parties
Titus Mbedingwa
Appellant / Original AccusedRepublic
Respondent / Original Prosecutor Counsel: Mr. KwikirizaAmounts and remedies
- Value of Disputed Property: TZS 31,975
- Purchase Price Claimed by Accused: TZS 23,000
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the property in question was sufficiently identified as belonging to the complainant (African Gospel Church)
- 02
Whether the doctrine of recent possession applied to the accused
- 03
Whether the restitution order in favor of the accused was proper
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The complainant argued that the property was not sufficiently identified as belonging to the accused and that the accused admitted to obtaining the property from a suspicious character. They contended that the accused could have been convicted under the doctrine of recent possession and that the restitution order was improper.
- Respondent
- The accused maintained that he bought the hardware lawfully from a person named Hassani Igwa for Shs. 23,000/= and that there was no direct evidence linking him to the theft. The trial magistrate found the identification of the property by the complainant insufficient and acquitted the accused, ordering restitution.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
HENRY GERVASIO v. R (1967) H.C.D. No. 129
Ownership of property in criminal cases must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, especially where there is a counter-claim of ownership.
- 02
Section 357, Criminal Procedure Act 1985
Restitution of property under Section 357 of the Criminal Procedure Act is only available where the accused is found guilty of an offence involving the property.
- 03
General criminal law principles
Doctrine of recent possession applies only where the accused is found in possession of recently stolen goods and there is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the goods belong to the complainant.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the complainant failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the property in question belonged to them. The identification of the property was insufficient, and the doctrine of recent possession could not be applied as there was no clear evidence linking the accused to the theft. The restitution order in favor of the accused was upheld as there was no basis to annul the trial magistrate's decision.
Obiter and limits
- In criminal cases, mere identification by the complainant is not enough; ownership must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
- The prosecution's failure to call the alleged seller as a witness weakened their case.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed
- Restitution order in favor of the accused upheld
- No order as to costs
Source and reliance status
TZHC · 17 November 1992
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TZHC
Judgment· 17 November 1992
i:.FPJLL.tT:... JU2.IS:DIC TI Or; HIGH CCXJJ.:T CiillITIJ;J., ,:';.Pl':"J;·J, N0.190F 1991 l . OJ1IGDV:J, CI!.TI1IlliJ, Gils·J NOo 115 OF 1990 DI3TRICT COORT OF TlJ30IU DISTRICT _AT TABORL T.ITCTl'.iii.S MBDTDIGIIU ( 0:i:igi.11e.l Accused) Vorsuc TR.~ 11G1'UJ;.3LIO 1. 0 • • 0 . • • • • . • • • 0 Ge O O f"I 4 0 • • e O O illJSPOlITi:n:rT ( 0-.dgin:cl P~c0s::icut0r) -· JUDG~HBNT a•-------- !"'-=0-td - __ CRJJJ.C['Js .......... Robbery 1-1it.h. violcmo c/s 2e6 of the Pon.al C-..)d0 Cap 16~ In tho al 1Prna ti vc. R0ccivin3 st;.;lc11. property c/s 311 ( 1.) of the renal Ocd.o Cap. 16 af. tho La1-1s. K:.TITI.2...~ The Af~icnn G0spcl Ch1,,;roh, in Tabora Municipali t;I, had in tho yGar 1990 . started oc.:nstruction works, fca~ inf:rastuc tw.u s t,::i cnh.:..:nco the ovangolisa1;ion mission, fc,:;.• which thoy aro tllo:;.'on.t •. Th.:i c . mst:i'.'u.cti011. hn:;:_-d1.:ir:-.ro or oata:t'ials, ·wore being l;:.:)pt r.ind lcckccl in c-..,;.rtaiw:;,:,s, situato in th;:: promi~s, but g'Oll(:rcll;y op:;rnwd b;:,r I"t·;.1, Lk'.~\JII i:Jil2...:;.Nio Th:-, sr.'.ic1 PU 1 I:&11.HDf .llliUi.l'JilI,. looked tl1c s:..icl c ,,ntaincrs, ::.:~ ·c.'..l!:: c:nd uf tho 11,:;:i:ld:..1-:;• d.ay of ?.!;)/1/1990, and wont .?.1-r:D. T.!y; 11i,_:;31t vZ 29/1/1990 ·i:"'s ,,111 c;yc ili·c1~sso, t0 tho parted uith building 1:t,<J.:l:'clw,•'.::.'O, u ..:·:,t'.1 ShGo319,675/=, the property of tho said CJ1Ui:'ch. Tho
q_w~ti,)n, cs t . . . v1h<...- -bhG cu.lp:cita w::::1°0? 3C1~r2.t:::d C(..no0:r110d o nthu.sia$1;1~ 2.y,.J.1 tho P 0licc .~.ncl. 0-v::; n th".; o:x:ubc::.~a.,1t sm1,:_:;us1..mgu had tu sproa·d their invo stig11tivc cnc:.:•g.i.c s~ t ..., nll s,.1:i'.'ts ol :,)L':!cos, and at Mbucc:,,ni a1•c2.,, f.'..S found a:)/1l'lo.vl1.JC1 t .)v ::::t It::p .?,1.~:::2,, 1 ':f,::i"O a, gon;.z-2tvr, piposf -· ~ . • ...,..,.# pip0 oorJ:-,.s, locks, Pima ma.ji ·oto. Tl:.0s0 I.'GCOV?rod f:i:'.:.n Ifbu.r:r.<:ni and Itaga. · · ·· :e.roas, ~:r.•c colloctivnly_ t:::l'ldo:;:od as Exhibits Pl> 1. 0£ c,Al.l'sc, tho propcr-lzy' <2 ) of God, could nvt bo st...,lcn wH.1.1:.Jut a t;..·000 9 :;:.11.:1 '--11 the 10/2/1990 divil'P revelation, I'GWa.lod -:ithcr haJ:ch-m.:,:es th0ug!.1 n_,t :9e. rticularizGd, frCG thG bush about c, t1.1 ...,us2.11Cl feo t, f1•c.i;-.1 i.il10 2nd accuse a_ ts 1'.0us0. .ind fr:xi the third accua::idts place, ·wc,.:c J:.'Ocovo:;.°"'1c1 tw,J si1i'.cs, on:i toilet tank exhibit P.11, w.1.l..i.Ch tbc se,:i.C_ 3::_•e. ,;,,ccnsod clai::isc1, to .l.1.E1,VO obtr:dnJd from tho first s.ccu:ct.)cl,. 1.nd_ conccdi:nc .in n0 dvL.1btful -t:cr;_lG, "ilia first accusod SiliU111 s/o rsr11-~Q, SW·,Ji:'l1 iP str2()l1.i.cJ.J.;y· ne..intairf;d, thr.,t ho had bvught tt.c said s&-:1c lw,rdw2.:co :J:z-J.10 1)11, fI•v.:.1 arty arri;y can R:'.SSi;JJ rm,2, for Shs.23,r;oo/=, after boing so c,})J;iroached b3~
tho oe,ic1 p8rson, 0n tl:.o 4/2/1990~ ThG t.:j_al ].fogistra~, l::c:v:i.:1c; jnd.ici2.l by :fuuncl; i.;bc first and third 3COUsOds, 11-.)t gu.li;;;l c,:-,.c1 t>,C([LU.tt::c1 t.'.'.:(l:' ,_,::.:•:~c:::Gc1 -th::t.t, Dx:i. r.11, f;Jl)_J'.J..IJ. on thc;;i~ b8 x-c sti tL,tcd t0 thoi::. T:.i:Ls ":-dor h;::.s pr,__:,v,):~;)a_ tho wrath of th0 ccmplain-:,nts, and hGno:> tb.is 2-)r:c2.l a.g.J.J.n3t tho sauc sccdd urclcr, thr,.ugh tho Tabora baS(.)c, Sonior Couns::::l, ~t:-. 1:wikinn., who pos:::.cl two ,gTounc1.s of ccr,1plaints, namely,- ( i) T:1c CGV..'.i:'J~ o:;."'J.~ d.~ ill h0ldi11g the prop0rw wD,s not sv.fficinntly, identifiGd to oo the a.ppo llantse On tho c0n"w:-ar.v·, tbs suspect who ua,s awD,rdod it, adr.1i ttcd to have obtail1ec1 th0 pr-0p0rty frc.m a suspiciv"Lts oh-'1l?actoro ( ii) Thoxc was no cause, t,.:; awaxcl tbo aocuseds propc:e·tjr 1 l;hon h0 cJU.ld ha.vc lloon cunvic·iJ'.)d "Lli.ic:.c:r tl:c dc.-ctrin:. of :rocont p0ss::: ssio11.4 Al thou::{.2 Gocls p:':',,pcrt;;r, the :,):, u:9c:~.,,i;;;7 c_;f J.fricr:m Gospel Church, was 3t ...lun, 0 givins cnosv.x, 1-:~ct is c2.cs.:.;.::.."''s it ::i_s the la,·r of tho ln:nd that hes to appzy. In ordo2•inz, the re sti tu-;;ti-::.;.1 of ~?l~-Jpcrt;;,r.9 i.,oo t:J2.-t t:.:c p1.'·~pcrty b3 Gi.von to t>;:, r-ccc the accusoc1s~ tho trial Ifoc;:i.st.'n-b-) in Dy vi0w 1.J.:::cl tbJ p~.:-:Ivisions :..:,f soctio11 357, of tho
Ci"'i:1.inal :Fr-xoc".:L;.:,.'C Let 1985, in ::iinc~, - t:1,~s0 provisions speak thus,- ".So,s ti on ).1'20 Hhc :i:C 1,:;?0l1 tL:::i appre:.'.'Onsion of a po::..,c0n ol::;,:e;;oa.~ ui th an of'£D 110c 9 n.n;y p:L,0JJC1.~t~~ i;:; tc;.:;:c ~1 fr-.:.n him, :the cuurt, b'.:..f(;:·:0 u.U.c.:~ :1:::. is 0~1.a:rg:::cL: nny m•d.cr that, tl,..::; pr0pcr t;/, ~--l):1:rt_;:tm:rc, f vN _ be l'OstOI'Od tv tho :901•sun uh_ c:.ppc::u:13 to -tho c,:,L1--rt, tu ~JO in-t:L -tlo.cl t!...co:ro t_,, ( 3 ) and. if it 1Xl tho pJr:1011 c.'1ar:::.,ccl, that it oc ro·s-cc:i.')c1, oi thcr tv llir:1, or such iUl the subs,; ot~~on is sa;yinc;, if thct, wlls:."'G upA1 approhonsion of a :pGrson ohargod, 1-rl th an ..,ffenc,:;, p:. 0po:1.>-cy is ta];;:on f:i'.'-:..n sLwh :pcrs0n, tho ovlll't 0 bc:foro whU".1 such I)O:rs0n is c!:.c.1.rc,ccl, ric.;r v:::•c1.or t1:.2t sLwh pr~p0rty- bo re st0:r:od to tho p:irsGn inoJ.r/;Jnc;· tl;e :::oousocl, whv G-;?l)co.,rs t,J 1:x:. onti tlocl to tho sz,.mo. Tln trL:il lbe;ir::rcrL,to, clj.L: jL1st thc:it, upon his s·::itisfaotion that the :pJ:',):S::, cutivn1 did nut 11-o:.',~v~---~:L1at 9 _tll~l1m:L'O found un tt.:J fiI"st been p0s0c"',. fvr atiJ:lntiun. Mr. Kuik:i.r:1::i.s e,ppoal, is o1Jvivuly e,:c'ut:ndod cm t~1c pr.;,visiwns of Section 358 ( 5), 0f ths Crbinc,l J?r,)ccdm:'C .ict 0 1985, hereafter to bG 02110 d tl-:c sot$ secld.n::; tho mn'.iulling of the::. urdcr 1 and
re st~ring of tho se,id pr?pory, t,.,, t.110 c,.npL:,Linnt, unrlor tbo provisi0ns of tho said soctiori 353 of tho act., ~ath l"Csp.'::ct to l,1ro Kuiki.r.m, while ho may rightly boast of b.avin.J. a right of 2vpo;u ·u.nclor mcn·ci0mcl subs0ction (5), tho prvpcrty :rosti tution order, l111e:_:.,:r.• the s0otion, 358 ( 1) of tho r,,ct, is awarck,blc il1 ro spa ct of p1.•0:;:-:~r·4Y- cri1:1.inc:i,Jy inv0l voct, i.c o to be re st0md to 0wror, -;,;rk:ro tho aocLJ.sOcl y.o:cs0n is ;-'Uil ty of an offonce nontion~d, in chapters ;;gpJI to.XXXI (both i,E,:<ll.}~siw), - in .. thcr v;,..1:r\is whore tho aocu.sOd has· ooon p:rosocrU:-wd t,J c0:nvio-civ1).~ 1}y 0r, on 1:Jct."?.lf c,f tJ::.o ownor, of tho :re st o:ro ::le c.:mpl,:!,i,.nnts. In t):--.is c.c:.s;:;, I ::.:_,_-;-, . ..loli.;G:'.:.tlJ 0:::-;_,;:.,s0,~: t~io roc-1rd tu OwnipI.'O s0 nt U:Ql)Ortuni ~- 0f scz•(:tL:;:";i ,rd w:::.iL, it ~1,:,.s t:. bo conco do cl, th.at the .:~frio::rn G0 spGl Gb:L-cc:~ 00n,,;-::L1J:•3, we :ro "o:c._:l,:o n vp: n and gooc'Ls s tvhln, as did 0bso1·v'Dcl tho trL,l c0;_i;:_~tJ t>o ovi::-;:"oc is suffo:dng fr0n · twin problo:os, th.at aro intir.1a to ly ,r.,,:rkinc-; ::;:;.:,inst.. t~1:::: c L:1,l::i,i:!:12nts olt1i:1, 0f own:: rsLip ovor the s2.moo Tho first p:r~blcn is t.112 ::;, t:1j_s o:: JC ,,,2,s 1Jr:-,sici~lls, ,:inrl all its olomonts circL11nst2ntic1, ,Jj_t:,. :cut clir.:i ct .:cvillonc:::: 'J 2,s
t0 who stulon tho alleged p:reip:.,}:-t;y·. Of c,✓ u:rsc, ,,o \r;1..l1l L~vo wi..3l::~('., t:.·.-c:t t~:;; culpTi ts bD ido n tifio cl at tl-io se3 ra , :=.mcl o -,;c n b:::: , I\.: cl-hEm::1:J ('. d. t:1 t:::c l 00 t, 02. u.,gb. to Wisbi!lr5 is ono tl?J.ng, mrl roelising wl:.at Jue h:>.•iO ,·risl'..Oi, is ;yo t 2.1:10thor, - they hnrcl]y go hi:ind in lv::nc:. If c;c,d J.i,1 nvt h:-:v-:) it, in ro spoct vf his proporty; it is own boyoncl :ronlisation i:.1 ao fGr as :~12.xi':;:i111., .. a lo sS3r ooing, is ooncorrnd. Tho· fact who tho:r ,-;J lilm it ur 110·0, is th?,t n ..,b,":1y as a aulpri t 1 was iclc nti:fio d as tlic sco no of crino • ( 4 ) cf pr0pe :r:ty fc;und in pusse ssioE, .:;:f the first and. t1lird. accused. twv sinks and om t0ilet tank ~.:lxh,. P11• It has of baen hGld by this court 1 and no lw,xra is dJro by sayiP-C it e.&,-ainst;; tb.at in a m:·ir.linal case, owmrsb.ip of property, by the ccnplaimnt, if it is the subject r.wt-ro:r of the charge, must be proved boy0nd I0i:1svnz.blo clc.iubt as being the property uf t.b.0 ocmplc1int, in particular if there is ca:..mtcr 0vrwrship claio. And if it is nut a voice frcm the wilrl8rross 1 tbe held.in~~ in thJ case of, HJNRY C§RVASD VSo Ro ( 1967) HoCoDo :N'o. 129 9 is h0:re to ger:10n';tr"atc what is nvw trit:3 la.w. It 1',olds- 11The aoccpt2,11ce ,:;f tb.e se bland as:.::u:rance s by too o·JLLTt::: lays open, f0r ma:rzy-
da11t,oers, and suol: ic"..onti:i:ioa.tion would not ro in any 1·1ay acccp-~.;1.bk, 0ven in a .oi vil c0urt. In a c:rir-1i11.a.l C~\SC olainant sh,.,Lu.cl asked · f0r'm2,~clcs u.-:!. t:.~s:: ;_Jr.:,perty 1 bcfcro it is sh<.)1m t,:• ,:,j_n 1 f:;•,..:r:1 whio!.1 the 0r11n.:rship he idGnt:i_fioL°. tho sirl~, 2,nc,_ t,:,il::::t tenk 9 "b8c:.w.so -Jf their label !lGM, I'Tl 7 RIC:ru.RD ASI'Jl~S th0 uissi..,n lo:--..,:o:,: 7 g..JJ s t•J d.isc0w1t tho sane, saying that such marks or l2o1)lo s o ...,ulct >.r-.~;c ·L:c,;11 d.mo, subsoq_L;.o:1t t0 tho :i:.-o covary c,f the s3r.1O, by 3ungllsU'1.(sUo Sr.,o,:i.:..::L21c; -?ur hio;::,.:;lf, P:: 7 RICH;~ JLI:INS sDys, F01-1.ncl Tho :re we, s t: c'.2'.Y, 1-;0 i~ :re a sko cl t ,) take ti:or.1 tv ◊Lt..~ churcho Tlo t<:;,,,l;: thee tb.cn:c 1 ;Jut lawr we ,-.c::co asli:ccl to xc fo.rn t:~o:,,, 2-11d h,1.ncl tb.CL1 tv tho h,lico., ------~----------- It is l)Ossiblc that mcr1-:::s vJO:ro put '!lL~~~,on ,=:.t uur o.hurol:., bofurc 1::.oinr:: t'::::::~1,?_d over t·..; tho p...,lio:::., This coulcl hnvo 1.>00 n tho cai:P, so as to ido nti:f'.r tLor.i. I will to 11 you, that tl1'J b::nhiil.--c bclGngs t·_; ·u.s, ovon wi t.~-:>.vut t.~-o :om:d<s of t!:-J.'_:; oanufaotu.1'0ro ' ( 5 ) oonsigmc nt IJ0l'"O ::..v(?.-rdin6 this knuwn thJ ic~c nti ·tzy- of b8rdm:1.lXl • 11 that the ti:-.1c ...f m¥l t>.oy cc.nnot v0uch that sL-.a.:,_ .11:--,rdw2..::i'.'O
cnjv.fOc1 c,::00poly of p0ss0ssi;)n by this African Gusp::il Cb:ill?C}:., r:mu tv use p-;;- 71 s .,,1;::. :•ro:rds, - ..'.!..1....!:_-y.1 sUi'.'O the Ccopgy: SJlls ) the hard,-m3;~ t0 others" ( w.dc:rlin.ing:---supplic cl) o Tl'.lls tu .c..01c1, as Mr.. Kwildma wants, tl.12.t tL<C, p1.'vpc1.'ty in q:t..Psti.:.m was in tho ciraumstanc0s idcntifiecl beyond r0a.s,jn;1.ble d0ubt 1 - ·c.'.:.c st:,._;_1:J.2,rd sot by law, t0 b: tho owror of th0 CUilplaimn-t, wuulc~ rlo;;ivnst:r:=.:dc i/:..:::-t, oithor tl-n ovi~1onco has ooon asS3 ssOd upside d,;t-m, 01.' th0.t tho 2.r5s) sr:r.:,.cnt scale· is nilfuntL,ning.. Sioply tho iclentificn.ti·.m of pr ... -pc:i:.·t-s i)~' iho ccrx;?lainent if ar-1/, left alot to oo do sired. Mro Kwikir.12., dic.1. alsv o(,ffJ'J:n-: thP.t, a.ftor all, t]:P first accused adni ttzd "i;·:., J.~.•::V8 obtairc,c'~ t~:.o pr-..,1:G:rt-J, fr ..m ,;1, su.s}?Oci<Jus charactoro 1 1lhilo I c.o n::it roally, get th:: tr.,:..:-r_pt uf this ccnplaint, ·I an suro t.1:'-.d.s dc.es 1 even if tJ:u.o, :lws .1ct 2,u:;;~r:1,:~·Gically by reason tl:croof, and or ipso 1 facto, r.12,}.o:; t:~ c(r.,pl::-,in:::-i:.t, -~:.::.::: 0wwr ~f tbc sc:.ic:. pr0:r;,crty. In arw cas8, i:f such was t)-1.Q n-s::c ssnont of H:s'• :l,d.;.;i.1:1a, of th8 s011c::: 0f p:r,;.i;,orty to th:l first. nccL1-~_,~, .it 1i.:::s cz.:,:-t::n'll.;; o::·G:i:'n-jur:',icial, f,::,1.'C11sically us::i1ess, in
th0 ca.spGct, -;;c 2,:i.-c doelinG wit.·--~ ~3-L;_t t.) !::.,TTO it ,1;::oplJ" JGl t wi thf is that tho f'irst accus::,d b,.ugI1t tbrJ s1:-::.;::'"', :-..·c ;3hs. 23,oeo/= fron .sm .';.:;_;r:i;y· Bcn1 cc.llcd Hassani Ig-wo, 2.::t,T,'.' ".,.J i11,; t.:,lC:. 1J~- "ul:f:: vor-.1 Enssr.-,ni Ig;,;a, thusg- eo u o On 4 t):_ lit ~:,:_--L::--:::.-:;.-, 1990 9 I :re c::.i.11 h;:ic:. 1:x:;o n t1.·a:-isfo1.".L'O ,..1 tc. Npnnr:'..a, anc1.. lato:r t·:, H'bo3rc,, 9 but l10 J.v~d. builc.ing r.1:'.t.o :::::.2ls, w1.1i c:h ho was ( 6 ) then ~~ u • ., ~~o str.crtcc1.. t·-.1 r-P.;:;vtis.to ,.,, t.o price. I:,, first 2,sk·..,c1 Sl,.s.,25.,ooc/= bt:;t 1:.c l::·i7:~i· ,:::.,_;.,;.:..:..:i::l ,<t S!:.so23 1 000/= •o•• I 12,tc:L' tu._;l;: ·s.':.c. sinks tv 3:rc1 e.cous:::d. 1 s plno::..., 11 This RaBG2-n I[£,;O, ti.:..;:., :;l"r.W r.1~_:1 1·1::-s :"7c:C:--Y.) stc: ~'..y t .;:'::-tu.:r-cc:., but 2..-.:k,i ttc a: t-.1 have sole}: the s,:.id :c.-r--rc:::-tic:;;, tu -~:.,o f::..r:3t acouse:l., Ho.-JC-1/Cr the al.'DY 02,n, wns n;i thor pr_,sec;;_·a.:d n--r i,·:rp.::•:;.'·>nt ns he was, g::v--c ovic"..ono:i f·:Jr. tl'J!3 pr00300.tion, an <.X:1ission wl-:ich c1.ccs n,..,-t; OG:rn c.J.,..-t vf prail:P fvr t!:0 p1"01:Pcution f.U\Y 1fr1Y• But it is ·clc&r in cy cin:ls, thr•·c t.1.:::.. fi:rst ::icous:;::!. b0ue.tt tho pr;_.,pcrty fr,.:,m this 9,nay nBn, 2,nc:. t:.,cit l:o ga-vc n,., cvicle:nc,:; on the. silo
of tr,_o pr0sscution, is no fault ·-•f t;.::::: first i'OOL:s-:.:c:.? n . L' it uoan tho prt..• __ orty bcl-..:.,ngs to tho ocrapl2,in?,nt. the d,_,ct:cir:c ,,f :re cont p0sso ssL:-i., :llulo I shu:lclc:;:.• tho t!:ink, wl10 tho:r there should If 7 in pc.ssing I m,:1.Y Sq'), e.. we.rd in whicJ.-. t~~o .·:.ocu.sc!I c2r.:o ixr~v :_1033.)ssLn uf tl:.0 s·~:,l;;n go,.:,d.s, t:10 d0ot-.ciw of ro cent p.::i::-~so ssLn, b:,..s n-.:, ':'.J))J.ic:::tion - s-00 Re vso. BJ.!J)L:T.f ( 1979) 7e Cro Apl)o has not bcc::-i. :;;>:i:v,Tv-:l t., J-:2,vc iJ~:or.. ct,:;;lon - t1ru:l ,;1,t tl:':.-t roo::.ntlyo In t..his oaeP, I hnvJ vi si iP c1. tb.c c vir}:i nee s.' .. 1:in::;7 tb.2, t n0wl1c ro ~1,:-,s it s::•..1wn, bo yond reas0ru::-,0lc cl_ •.,ubt, t!.lat tho prc,::)S~'W 1"Cl ~%"°cl. t~ t.\c c:r.rplaimnto And.s if IUsa:rn IG::C: s-Jlcl tho s3no tc fi:l.~at accusvcl the dC,10·~:riw ,...,f recent pussc ssion ur- .. 1·,·1··;,. ( 7 ) cannot iXl inv~\:ocl at,-::1inst the fi:i. st aocusGcl. 0 Consoquontly, I haw fc.;und n:., gr·:,unc=t, or r;iato:ri2,l v:L,~.G ,rliioh~ I can :L□pugn am annul tho trir,.l 1,12,,2;istr2,to' s 0:cc\:.::,:0.9 - t>:d; the acousccl, crp:;:,oo.,_""'O,} to the trial rlnc;ist:r::t::: to 7-JO 011-t:!.."clc:~ t~Y.)l"D-toj ns to clcs):cv;;J a :restitution Tho a:p:poal /7 1;-J_C'O 2 ,s -'- '-r ";/)
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.