KCC 770/2001

This case involved the validity of a confession of an individual convicted of robbery. Although he argued he had not been presented to the office of public prosecution within the deadline this was irrelevant as it was not argued at the elementary court.

Background

An appellant said in his grounds of appeal that the appealed ruling by which he was convicted of robbery had insufficient evidence of causation and had erred in the application of law. He said that he maintained before the court that his confession was invalid because he was forced to make it but the court dismissed this defence. He also said that he was not presented to the office of public prosecution within the legal deadline.

Decision