Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
July 6, 2023
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
This a criminal appeal the appellant filed on 22 May 2023 upon leave of the Court
on 10 May 2023. Per the notice of appeal, the appellant appears to be dissatisfied
with the sentences in two separate cases of defilement that within a couple of
months the Circuit Court, Hohoe imposed on him. That is, 29 August 2011 and 29
November 2011. His prayer in this appeal, strictly speaking, is not against the
convictions but rather the sentences of 20 years, and 240 months the trial imposed
in each case. His prayer in this appeal is for mitigation of the sentences on grounds
that they are “manifestly harsh and excessive” praying the court “to consider the
facts of the cases and reduce the sentence to the minimum … to run concurrent”.
The facts on record are that the appellant was convicted and sentenced on the two
separate cases. He had filed this appeal to cover the two convictions for defilement
at separate dates by the Circuit Court Hohoe. The appellant pleaded not guilty to
the charges in both trials for defilement.
With respect to the first case1, the trial court on 29 August 2011 found appellant
guilty after a full trial and sentenced him to “a prison term of twenty (20) years
IHL”. In addition, the court imposed a fine of GH¢300.00 to be paid to the victim,
a child of seven years “to defray part of her medical expenses”. The second case2
was also on a charge of defilement of a child of eight (8) years. Here too, appellant
pleaded not guilty, compelling a full trial but threw in the towel just prior to when
the prosecution was about to close its case. The trial judge entered a plea of guilt
in place of the earlier non-guilty plea, convicted the appellant on his plea and
imposed a sentence of 240 months, i.e. 20 years.
After over ten years in jail, the appellant upon leave is praying the court for
mitigation of the sentence on grounds they are excessive and harsh, praying the
court for an order for the sentences to run concurrently. The appellant also indicts
the trial judge for failing to “consider any available mitigating factors. Lastly, the
appellant prays the court to consider “the psychological and negative effect of long
incarceration” and to allow both sentences to run concurrently.
Whilst opposing the appeal, learned state attorney drew the court’s attention to a
clear procedural impropriety. That is, the appellant per the single appeal seems to
contest the two separately distinct criminal convictions pursuant to two separ
AI Generated Summary
Justice George Buadi of the High Court (Ho) heard an unrepresented appellant’s criminal appeal challenging only the sentences imposed by the Hohoe Circuit Court in two separate 2011 defilement cases involving seven-year-old Victoria Ankama and eight-year-old Dora Dankwa. After more than ten years in custody, the appellant argued the 20-year and 240-month terms were harsh and excessive and sought concurrency, citing first-offender status, long incarceration, remorse, and ongoing university studies. The State flagged procedural impropriety in a single notice addressing two distinct convictions, but the court, exercising inherent jurisdiction and mindful of access to justice, treated the matter as a consolidated appeal. Reciting the facts and emphasizing defilement’s statutory seriousness (seven to twenty-five years under Act 29), the court found largely aggravating circumstances but applied reformative principles to reduce the first sentence to ten years while maintaining the 240-month sentence in the second case. Finally, under section 301 of Act 30, the court ordered the sentences to run concurrently.