MAXWELL KOFI GYASI v. REPUBLIC
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ADJEI, JA – PRESIDING
- CECILIA H. SOWAH, JA
- HENRY KWOFIE, JA
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Constitutional Law
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The appellant was convicted of conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery despite pleading 'not guilty.' The trial judge failed to properly evaluate the evidence against the standard burden of proof, leading to an appeal. The Court of Appeal found the trial judge's approach flawed but upheld the conviction due to overwhelming evidence, instructing that the sentence commence from the date of conviction, not arrest. The appellant's sentence was reduced from 21 years to 16 years, recognizing his remorse and age at the time of the offense.
JUDGEMENT
ADJEI, J. A:
Charges of conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery contrary to sections 23(1) of Act 29 and 149 of Act 29 as amended by Act 646 respectively were preferred against the appellant herein and two other persons. They were arraigned before the High Court, Kumasi. The trial High Court heard the matter in the absence of the 3rd accused person who absconded and never appeared before the said trial court. The 1st accused person who is the appellant in this appeal and the 2nd accused person pleaded ‘not guilty’ to both counts.
The brief facts of the case presented before the trial High Court were that the complainant who testified as PW1 was the driver of Nissan Primera Taxi cab with Registration mark GT 3738 T on 9th May 2005. At midnight, he took the three accused persons as passengers from Asafo Neoplan Station to Ahimadiyya Secondary School in Kumasi. The accused persons styled themselves as students of Ahimadiyya Secondary School and did not want its tutors to see them and would therefore not use the main gate. The first and second accused persons sat at the back of the taxi cab while the third accused person sat on the passenger seat in front.
On reaching the gate of the school, the accused persons told the complainant to drive beyond it but he resisted. The third accused person then removed the ignition key from the Taxi and the 1st and 2nd accused persons alighted from the back seats. The 2nd accused person pulled out a pistol and ordered the complainant to come out from the Taxi cab. The 2nd accused person then gave a warning shot and threatened to kill the complainant if he remained in the taxi cab. He came out of the taxi for fear of his life.
The complainant on seeing the third accused person removing the ignition key attempted to prevent him. The second accused person pulled out his pistol and shot the complainant on the right arm and further pushed him into a nearby gutter. The accused person then drove off the taxi and left the complainant to his fate.
At the trial, the prosecution called three witnesses. The two accused persons testified but did not called witnesses. After the close the case of the accused persons case the trail High Court Judge convicted all the accused persons including the third accused person who was at large. The trial High Court did not discuss and evaluate the evidence on record which a trial Judge is mandated to do. The entire judgement is as follows:
“By court the accused persons are charged wi