REPUBLIC v. EKENE ANOZIE
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- APALOO JA (PRESIDING)
- GYAESAYOR JA
- SOWAH JA
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In this appeal, the Republic challenged the acquittal of the Respondent on charges of conspiracy to rob and robbery. The appellate court found that the trial court had erred in interpreting the law on conspiracy and failing to properly assess the identification evidence and other corroborative evidence. The court ruled that the statutory revision done by the Law Review Commissioner did not have the authority to change the substantive law. The court further held that there was sufficient evidence to prove the charges against the Respondent, quashed the trial courts acquittal, and sentenced the Respondent to 25 years for conspiracy and 30 years for robbery, to run concurrently.
APALOO JA; This is an appeal by the Republic against the decision of the High Court Accra delivered on 4th April 2012. The decision acquitted and discharged the Respondent on charges of conspiracy to rob and robbery contrary to sections 23(1) and 149 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29).
In the trial Court the Respondent was the 2nd accused and was charged with the 1st accused, Joseph Baidoo and one other person at large, with the offences of conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery contrary to sections 23(1) and 149 of Act 29.
It was the case of the Prosecution that on 29th September, 2008 at about 2:30am, three young men including the Respondent armed with guns attacked Louis Doe Atsiatorme (PW1) and his family. At gun point they robbed PW1 of his laptop and an amount of GH¢500.00. They also took away assorted mobile phones and two other laptops belonging to other members of the family. A report was made to the Sakumono Police who in the course of investigations received a tip off from PW1 that his ACER laptop had been found in possession of one Godsway (PW5). PW5 led the Police to Tsatsu (PW7) who in turn stated that he had bought the laptop from the 1st accused. PW1 later identified the laptop as his. On 21st October 2008, the Respondent and the 1st accused were arrested at Somanya and two laptops; an ACER and an HP were found in their possession. The Respondent claimed ownership of the HP laptop. At the Tema Regional CID, the complainant, his wife (PW2) and one of his three children (PW4) identified both the Respondent and 1st accused as the persons who came to rob them on the day of the incident. Senam (PW3) also identified them as the robbers who came to their house. He identified the HP laptop as his. The Prosecution called nine witnesses at the trial. The trial Court acquitted and discharged the Respondent and 1st accused on the count of conspiracy, but convicted the 1st accused on the charge of robbery. The Respondent was however acquitted on the same charge of robbery. These acquittals led to this very appeal with the following grounds;
“1. The Judgment cannot be supported in law having regard to
the evidence adduced at the trial by the appellant.
2. The Learned trial Judge erred in law in his interpretation on
the law of conspiracy.
3. The learned trial Judge erred in his application of the facts and
evidence adduced at the trial to the law on conspiracy.
4. The learned trial Judge erred by concluding that the
prosecution di