IMORO ABDULAI v. REPUBLIC
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- AYEBI J.A. (PRESIDING)
- IRENE C. DANQUAH J.A.
- TANKO I. O. AMADU J.A
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence Law
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The appellant was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to 30 years imprisonment, which he appealed on the grounds of excessive sentencing and insufficient evidence. Although inconsistencies were found in the appellant's statements, circumstantial evidence linked him to the crime. The appeal court found the conviction justified but reduced the sentence to 15 years. The court critiqued the trial judge for not providing reasoning for the original sentence but ultimately upheld the conviction and revised sentence.
JUDGMENT
AYEBI J.A.
The appellant was charged before a Kumasi High Court for robbery contrary to section 149 of Act 29/60 as amended by Act 646 of 2003. The particulars state that on 28th day of December, 2002 at Ejisu Asawasi in the Ashanti Region, the appellant with others at large, robbed Nana Berchie Afram II of 22 assorted men’s cover cloths, forty shirts, mobile phone, wrist watch, 24 underwears, assorted perfumes and jewelry, worth ¢40million (GH¢4,000.00) at gun point.
On his arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty. At his own request, the court adjourned the trial to enable him engage a counsel of his own. The records show that he could not engage a counsel as he intimated. And after a full trial, he was found guilty and convicted. The trial court sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment with Hard Labour on 14th March, 2006.
On 22nd November 2011, appellant filed a motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. The record of proceedings does not appear comprehensive. But on 19th December 2011, a purported notice of petition of appeal was filed. The grounds of the petition are that:
1. the sentence is too harsh and excessive
2. the findings of the trial court are not supported by the evidence
3. the sentence be drastically reduced or in the alternative a fine be imposed.
I noticed that the motion for extension of time within which to file an appeal was filed by a law firm. In the affidavit in support appellant averred that his “appeal against sentence has a reasonable chance of success”. That averment meant that the appellant intended to appeal against the sentence of 30 years IHL only.
But the grounds of appeal, it is noticed went beyond a complaint against sentence. The second ground of appeal implicitly is a complaint against conviction for the offence as well. And although the notice of appeal was signed by the same law firm which filed the motion for extension of time to appeal, the grounds of appeal to say the least does not depict the act/product of a professional lawyer.
On the face of the grounds of appeal especially ground (3), only a lay person such as the appellant himself could have formulated grounds of appeal in such language.
However since this court is a court of both law and equity, and equity is concerned with substance rather than form, in order to do justice, I take it that the grounds of appeal as filed is against both conviction and sentence. This is clearly demonstrated on the written submission on