Alex Katemu vs Republic (High Court Criminal Appeal No. 84/1999) [2000] TZHC 477 (11 October 2000)

. r ri:;-::, ',4 ..;;t....,_ ... , ' ,, I IN THE HIGH COU'.tfI:' OF T.,\lliZANiii. . AT IRING/ HIGH COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL N0.84/1999 ORIGINAL MUFJNDI DISTRIC'.C COURT CRIMimU. CiE NO. 132/98 BEFORE: MWAK4$iGi\ 1 PDM ,\LEX K4TEMU • • ••••• • o •• '• • o o • iu'PELLiT Versus.: THE REPUBLIC • • o o • • • ~ ••••• •· • • 1IBSPONDENT JUDGM.ENT '.rhe appellant was convicted of rape on 15th February, 1999• The notice of his intenion to appeal is dated 18th March, 1999.,., This means . I that the notice was given ·ov,r ·t;hirty days after the convic 1 tion. Now section ,361 (ar of "tJ:fo' Criminal Procedure iLct.:, 1985 1 provides ~ '.... • • ➔ •• • i ' . . : . ' • . that no appeal in a proceng of a criinal nature against any finding, :. : ';' . - .::~ . ,. entenc_e or order shall be entertained unless the appellant shall have filed .,. , •. . • ,. , .. , , • -· t4 i }q,s notice of illtenticm to appeal ,within ·ten days from the date of any such f;i.nding, sentence or order. It fo1lows that this appeal was filed twenty - three days out of"time.· '.It is therefore -time -barred.· /\Ssuming it was in time 1 there is strong evidence that the appellant gwied penetration whn rap±ng--the;· coplainant, and at eleven years of age th~ ,complaint did not have capacity to ,consent to the act. l'he appeal would, , ,-' i/:·;1 ;. =:, '\ ., .:~ ), '.:,,. , r .\ i, J;. think :,a te . s;en,rce is a 1~ ttle . too tiff. . II?, the cir.cumstances I. ~~d.Qe ~t. ~Ile ~roμi. t li.£. _imJ>:r5:9μment. which was impose~ to ,statutory minimum of thirty ys imprisonment•. .... . . Save as _regar een.teI).ce, ... the appeal is othe;rwise dismissed. Conviction is upheld.··,;" ., .. , ' ' lie'M~ MACKANJA, J. 1 . . . ll/10/2000

2

0.,. {,, r

2 - 4Ppellant: l~bsent Mr. Manyanda1 State ~ttorney: For Republic. I certify that this is a true copy of the original. J,,.G. DISTiUCT RIDISTRl.ffie ) . """I . . ·• .. ' .. .,._ ...