CHARLES ANSAH v. THE REPUBLIC

DARKO ASARE JSC:

This appeal is at the instance of the Convict/Appellant, (hereafter referred to as Appellant) against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Accra dated the 26th of October 2016, by which the Appellant’s term of imprisonment of 33 years imposed by the trial court was reduced to a term of 25 years in respect of a charge of robbery contrary to section 149 of the Criminal and other Offences Act, 1960 Act 29 as amended by Act 646 of 2003.

FACTS

The facts of the case may be stated simply.

The complainant, a trader, was traveling from New Akim Tafo to Accra with his driver, George Ansah, and the driver's son, the 1st accused person, who worked as the driver's mate. The complainant had informed them that he intended to buy goods and pay creditors in Accra and was carrying GHC28,550.00. Along the way, they picked up the 2nd accused person, who was dressed in farm gear and carrying a cutlass, and later the 5th accused person joined them. At Nsuo Abenaso, the 2nd accused person suddenly attacked the complainant with a cutlass and robbed him of the sum of GHC28,550.00. The driver pursued the 2nd and 5th accused persons but was threatened with harm. Shortly after, a passerby was informed of the incident and helped arrest the 2nd accused person. The 2nd accused person confessed to the crime and implicated the 1st accused person, alleging that they had conspired with others to commit the robbery. The 4th accused person was charged with dishonestly receiving part of the stolen money and pleaded guilty. The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd accused persons were convicted of conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery and sentenced to 33 years' imprisonment with hard labor. The High Court Judge imposed the sentence to deter others from committing similar crimes, considering the rising crime rate and the circumstances of the offense. The 2nd accused person appealed the sentence to the Court of Appeal, which allowed the appeal in part and reduced the sentence from 33 years to 25 years, reasoning that the Appellant was entitled to a lesser sentence than the 1st Accused person who was the actual architect of the crime. Being dissatisfied with the reduction of his sentence from 33 years to 25 years by the Court of Appeal, the Appellant has further appealed to this Court, inviting us to interfere with the decision of the Court of Appeal and reduce his 25 year sentence to the barest minimum as same is harsh and excessive. He formulated the following grounds:-