THE STATE v. AMPOMAH
1960
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- GRANVILLE SHARP
- SARKODEE-ADOO
- AKIWUMI JJ.S.C
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
1960
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case involves an appeal against a manslaughter conviction. The appellant was initially charged with murder but convicted of manslaughter for the death of Sulemanu Moshie during a fight. The appeal was based on two grounds: the unreasonableness of the verdict and the trial judge's error in law regarding the manslaughter conviction. The court found that the trial judge misdirected himself on facts related to self-defence and drew inferences inconsistent with accepted evidence. The appeal court emphasized that a person assaulted is entitled to strike back, even fatally, in self-defence under section 63(4) of the Criminal Code. As a result, the appeal was allowed, the conviction was quashed, and the appellant was acquitted and discharged.
JUDGMENT OF SARKODEE-ADOO J.S.C.
Sarkodee-Adoo, J.S.C., delivered the judgment of the court: This is an appeal from a conviction of manslaughter before Ollennu J., sitting with assessors at the Assizes holden at Tamale on the 10th day of September, 1960. The appellant was charged with the murder of one Sulemanu Moshie at Bolgatanga in Northern Ghana. Each of the assessors expressed an opinion of not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. The learned trial judge agreed with the opinions so expressed and found the appellant not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter and convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to five years' imprisonment with hard labour.
The appellant by his counsel argued the appeal on two grounds, namely:—
“1. Verdict is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence.
2. The trial judge was wrong in law in holding that the appellant was guilty of manslaughter."
The facts are not seriously in dispute and it is sufficient to say that the deceased, a Moshie man, and two of three other Moshie men got into a dispute with the appellant resulting in a fight, in the course of which the appellant used a pounding stick, Exhibit "A", and struck the deceased with it.
The learned trial judge in the course of his judgment said:
"Of the witnesses who have given evidence before this court I am perfectly satisfied that, with the exception of Asare, P.W.3, each of them is a witness whose veracity is beyond reproach. I accept the evidence given by all those witnesses for the prosecution, and I also accept the evidence as contained in the deposition of the witnesses whose appearance have been dispensed with."
"From the whole of the facts which I have accepted I have arrived at the conclusion without reasonable doubt that the deceased Sulemanu Moshie died as a result of harm, that that harm is unlawful, and that that harm was inflicted by the defendant deliberately with intent to cause his death.
"Having, however, directed my attention to sections 250 and 251 or the Criminal Code Cap. 9, 1 have come to the conclusion upon the evidence even of the prosecution itself that the homicide in this case is manslaughter only and not murder.
"I have given careful consideration to the evidence led by the defendant on his behalf and the two defences implied in that evidence, [p.264] namely: that he had nothing whatsoever to do with cause of the death of Sulemanu Moshie, and in the alternative, that if the court should find t