ISAAC YAW ATTRAM v. THE REPUBLIC

MENSAH-HOMIAH, (J. A.):

On 28th August 2008, the appellant and two others were arraigned before the High Court, Accra on two (2) counts of conspiracy to commit crime to wit robbery, and robbery contrary to Sections 23(1) and 149 of the Criminal Offences Act 1960 (Act 29) as amended by the Criminal Code (Amendment) Act, 2003 (Act 646). On the charge sheet, there was a third count of dishonestly receiving but that did not relate to the Appellant. After a full trial, the Appellant and the two (2) others were pronounced guilty of the offences, convicted and sentenced to thirty (30) years imprisonment with hard labour on each count to run concurrently. This appeal lodged pursuant to leave of this Court granted on 26th November, 2019 is against the sentence imposed on the Appellant.

The facts of the case as presented by the Prosecutor are that, on 21st July 2007 at about 1:30 a.m. the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Accused Persons together with the 6th Accused Person (at large), armed with a locally manufactured pistol and knives attacked the complainants, Ato Korsah and Gifty Opoku in their residence at Hydrofoam Estates, Spintex Road. The Accused persons inflicted wounds on the 1st Complainant, Ato Korsah. The 2nd and 3rd Accused persons forcibly had sex with the house help of the Complainants in turns. They also succeeded in taking away the following items: Passport No. HO506222, eight (8) wrist watches, four (4) mobile phones, US$400, GHC160, bottles of perfume, gold & silver jewelries including an engagement ring and a car key. Immediately after the operation, the Accused Persons sold the 2nd Complainant’s passport to a certain lady who replaced the picture of the true owner of the passport. Through investigations, the Appellant and others were arrested.

We would comment on the form by which the Appellant initiated the appeal even though that may be trivial. In as much as this court looks at the substance, rather than the form, the error ought to be pointed out. The Appellant filed a “Petition of Appeal” instead of a “Notice of Appeal”. The correct procedure is that an Appeal against the conviction and/or sentence of the High Court to the Court of Appeal is commenced by a “Notice of Appeal”. See rule 38 of the Court of Appeal Rules, C.I. 19 and Form 1 or 2 set out in Part II of the Schedule. We will however not be blinded by this technical glitch and would go into the merits of the appeal in due course.

The Appellant appealed to this court on the sole ground that th