DEXTER EDDIE JOHNSON v. THE REPUBLIC

J U D G M E N T

DR. DATE-BAH JSC:

On the 18th day of June 2008, the appellant was convicted of a grisly murder by a jury at the Fast Track High Court, Accra. The appellant appealed against his conviction and against an order by the High Court forfeiting his Mercedes Benz car. The appellant also filed supplementary grounds of appeal contending that the death sentence imposed on him violated the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment under article 15(2) of the 1992 Constitution; the right to protection from arbitrary deprivation of life under article 13(1) of the Constitution; and the right to a fair trial under artlcle 19(1) of the Constitution. The appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, resulting in the present further appeal to this Court.

Before this Court, the appellant has appealed against both conviction and sentence. His grounds of appeal are as follows:

“(a) Grounds of appeal against Conviction:

The dismissal of the Appellant’s appeal against conviction for murder is unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence on record.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice as the Trial High Court Judge’s acquittal of the Appellant on the charge of conspiracy to commit murder rendered the conviction on murder unsafe.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice due to the complete failure by the trial High Court Judge to give a proper direction on circumstantial evidence.

The Court of Appeal erred in ignoring the inadmissible hearsay evidence that was admitted by the trial High Court with severe prejudice for the defence.

The Court of Appeal should have quashed the Appellant’s conviction as the toll ticket allegedly recovered from the appellant’s car was obtained in breach of the rules regarding searches of a suspect’s property and should not have been admitted.

(b) Grounds of appeal against Sentence:

As sentencing is a question of law to be solely determined by the Trial High Court Judge at the jury trial, the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the challenge to the mandatory death penalty for murder could only be dealt with on appeal if it was raised as an issue before the Trial High Court Judge.

The mandatory imposition of the death penalty on the Appellant for murder cannot stand since section 46 of the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act 29) is in utter contravention of Articles 15(2) and 33(5) of the 1992 Constitution that prohibits inhu