JUDGMENT ON CRIMINAL APPEAL
Upon leave of the Court dated 22 November 2022, the appellant filed the notice of
appeal a day after, that is, 23 November 2022. The appeal is just for the mitigation
of the sentence, on grounds that “the 12 years sentence is harsh”, and that besides,
the appellant is “a first time offender”.
The appellant was on 17 April 2019 convicted by the Circuit Court Ho for having
on 28 September 2017 been found by the police in possession of a narcotic drug,
cannabis Sativa without lawful authority contrary to s.2(1) Narcotic Drug (Control,
Enforcement, and Sanctions) Act, 1990 (PNDC Law 236). The appellant pleaded
not guilty to the charge. The trial circuit court judge found otherwise and
convicted the appellant of the offence and sentenced him to 12 years IHL. It is this
decision of the court in sentencing the appellant to 12 years that the appellant feels
dissatisfied and has appealed on grounds that it is harsh and that he is a first
offender.
I have read the judgment of the trial court. The learned trial judge dutifully and
vividly recited the proceedings of the court and most importantly the ingredients
required for the proof of the charge or evidence thereof from both parties. The
judge concluded at the close of the case that the charges were soundly proven.
That is, the court established that the appellant was not only found to be in
possession of a substance the Forensic Laboratory proved to be narcotic Sativa,
packed in a saloon car but also that the appellant knew the contents of what was
neatly packed in hidden compartments of the saloon car as that of narcotic and its
nature as harmful. Besides, the trial court found that the appellant failed to show
lawful authority or justification to have possession of the narcotic.
By the evidence adduced and as captured in the judgment of the trial court, I find
the judgement of the trial court as sound and based on law, indeed beautifully
crafted. The appellant does not contest his conviction, but rather the 12-year
sentence the trial court imposed, which the appellant describes as harsh on
grounds mainly that he is a first-offender. The law under which the accused was
prosecuted contains the punishment of a minimum of ten years upon conviction
of the offence. Section 2(2) of the law – the Narcotic Drug (Control, Enforcement,
and Sanctions) Act, 1990 (PNDC Law 236) provides that:
(2) A person found guilty of an offense under subsection (1) is liable on
