Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
October 24, 1986
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
JUDGMENT OF MENSAH AG. J.
This is an appeal lodged by the appellant against his conviction and sentence.
The main grounds of appeal were that the judgment or order is unreasonable and cannot be supported by the evidence and that the sentence of twelve months is harsh. Though the petition talks of additional grounds to be filed on the receipt of the record of proceedings, yet up to the time of the hearing of the substantive appeal, no such additional grounds have been filed by counsel.
It would therefore seem to this court that the submissions made by counsel to the court do not reflect the main grounds of appeal because in this case, the appellant pleaded guilty and was convicted on his plea. Yet counsel's argument was that since the appellant gave an explanation to the trial magistrate which amounted to a plea of not guilty which the magistrate failed to record, the conviction entered by the trial court as well as the sentence were null and void. I allowed counsel to proceed with his submission in view of the legal implications involved, having regard to the record of proceedings.
Counsel for the respondent in a short reply submitted that the conviction was proper because by convicting the appellant on his own plea, it meant the trial court did not accept the explanation of the appellant.
Counsel for the appellant did not cite any statute nor decided case to support his contention that if the accused pleads guilty and gives an explanation which amounts to a plea of not guilty, the trial court should enter a plea of not guilty on his behalf and if this was not done, then the conviction is void.
It is interesting to note that before the Courts Act, 1971 (Act 372) was enacted in 1971, section 324 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1960 (Act 30) stated that no appeal shall be entertained against conviction by an accused person who has pleaded guilty and has been convicted on his plea. But section 114 and the Third Schedule to Act 372, repealed the said mandatory provision mentioned (supra). And now section 19 of Act 372 purports to give to an accused who has pleaded guilty and has been convicted, the right of appeal to the High Court.
[p.755]
But it is my considered opinion that to reopen a case by an appellate court where the appellant pleaded guilty and was convicted, there must be exceptional circumstances to warrant it. There are many such exceptional circumstances but for the purposes of this appeal, this court would limit itself to a situatio
AI Generated Summary
Acting Justice Mensah of the High Court heard an appeal by an accused who had been convicted and sentenced to twelve months’ imprisonment after a recorded guilty plea in a magistrate’s court. Although the appellant’s grounds included unreasonableness and harshness, the crux was that he had offered an explanation at arraignment—arising from a land dispute and a cutlass—that effectively negated or rendered ambiguous the guilty plea. Mensah Ag. J reviewed the statutory framework: before the Courts Act, 1971 (Act 372), section 324(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code barred appeals from convictions on guilty pleas, but Act 372 repealed that bar and section 19 now permits appeals. Emphasizing that appellate intervention after a guilty plea is reserved for exceptional circumstances, he cited Ofei v. The State, R v. Golathan, and other authorities to conclude the magistrate should have entered a plea of not guilty and held a trial. Finding the trial a nullity, and given roughly six months already served, he quashed the conviction and sentence and ordered an acquittal and discharge.