DC CRIMINAL APPEAL NO
The prosecution failed to prove the offence of armed robbery beyond reasonable doubt due to lack of proper identification, failure to tender the stolen mobile phone as evidence, and improper admission of the caution statement. Additionally, the trial court erred by convicting the appellant on both the main and alternative counts.
Source excerpt
- Armed robbery
- Retaining stolen property
- Identification evidence
- Burden of proof
- Admissibility of evidence
- Alternative charges