[1961]DLSC5499 • November 6, 1961 • Supreme Court •
PRACTICE NOTE: STATE vs. AMOH
The accused, Kwame Amoh, was charged with murder. The trial involved a jury, and the judge was required to sum up the law and evidence after the close of the case. The accused denied the charge, claiming he was not present at the scene and that his statement was involuntary due to police beating.
read moreThe function of the trial judge after the conclusion of the whole evidence in criminal trials with a jury is set out in section 277 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Act 30) and it reads: “When, in a trial before a jury, the case on both sides is closed, the judge shall, if necessary, sum up the law and evidence in the case.” The section appears to use language which confers a discretion, but we are of the opinion that the expression “shall, if necessary,” has compelling effect. The duty of the trial judge to sum up the law and the evidence is not less imperative by reference to the exercise of a discretion, and we think that the duty to sum up, especially in a trial for a capital crime, is as obligatory as it would have been if the words “if necessary” had been omitted from the section. The summing-up was begun by the learned trial judge by telling the jury that the accused was before them on a charge of murder and the place where the offence was committed. The learned tria...