GEORGE ABORMEGAH vs. THE REPUBLIC [2009]DLCA8921

Date	2009-06-25
Suit No.	CRIMINAL APPEAL SUIT NO. H2/2/09
Citation No.	[2009]DLCA8921

PIESARE JA (PRESIDING)

APALOO JA

IRENE DANQUAH JA

MRS. YVONNE ATAKORA-OBUOBISA (PSA) FOR THE REPUBLIC RESPONDENT

MR. C. K. HOEYI FOR THE APPELLANT

[2009]DLCA8921
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >GEORGE ABORMEGAH<o:p></o:p>(APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

CRIMINAL APPEAL SUIT
NO. H2/2/09&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE:&nbsp; 25TH JUNE 2009<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MRS.&nbsp; YVONNE ATAKORA-OBUOBISA (PSA) FOR THE
REPUBLIC RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

MR. C. K. HOEYI FOR THE APPELLANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p>PIESARE
JA (PRESIDING), APALOO JA, IRENE DANQUAH JA&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;border:none;
mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>APALOO
JA; &nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>The appellant was charged jointly with one other person
before the High Court presided over by Charles Quist J. with the offences of
conspiracy to rob and robbery contrary to Sections 23(1) and 149 respectively
of the Criminal Code, 1960 Act 29 as amended by the Criminal (Amendment) Code
2003 Act 646.<o:p></o:p>The
appellant pleaded not guilty to both charges and was tried summarily.&nbsp; At the end of the trial he was convicted and
sentenced to a term of 40 years on each count to run concurrently in hard
labour.<o:p></o:p>This
appeal is against the conviction and sentence.&nbsp;
In his notice of appeal against conviction and sentence, the appellant
filed the following grounds of appeal to wit;<o:p></o:p>“(1)&nbsp;&nbsp;
The conviction is unreasonable and cannot be supported having &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
regard to the evidence.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;
(2)&nbsp;&nbsp; There was a substantial
miscarriage of justice.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp; (3) The
sentence is harsh and excessive having regard to the fact&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
that the appellant has no previous criminal conviction.”<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The brief and undisputed facts are that the 1st
accused in the court below, Charles Modzaka was engaged/employed by Phase Two
Company Ltd, a company that dealt in computers at Adenta Frafraha.&nbsp; He was dismissed as a driver after six months
for unsatisfactory performance of duties by the company.&nbsp; 2nd accused now appellant before
this Court lived in the same premises with the 1st accused at Adenta
village in Accra.&nbsp; On Sunday, the 19th
February 2006, about 7am when the appellant was doing his laundry the 1st
accused requested him to drive him in a car belonging to the 1st
accused to the premises of the Phase Two Company to enable him collect certain
items of his.&nbsp; The appellant complied
with the request and drove him there.&nbsp;
When the two got to the premises of the company, the 1st
accused entered his former employer’s premises while the appellant remained in
the vehicle waiting his return.&nbsp; According
to the appellant he later bought some food from a nearby vendor and was eating
it in the car when 1st accused returned to the car with some
computers and their accessories and packed them into the car and they drove off
to their house and subsequently to Jamestown for the goods to be discharged
there.<o:p></o:p>Later
in the day about 9.00am, one Juliana Brown an employee of the company went to
the company’s premises to put off the lights and air –conditioners.&nbsp; She found the watchman lying dead in a pool
of blood.&nbsp; When she looked around the
offices she observed that six computers and some laptops had been stolen from
the premises.&nbsp; The matter was accordingly
reported to the police who after the investigations preferred the charges
against the accused persons.<o:p></o:p>In
arguing the first ground of appeal to wit “the
conviction is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the
evidence,” Mr. Hoeyi Counsel for the appellant in his submissions before us
contended that;<o:p></o:p>“Regarding the charge of conspiracy
preferred against the appellant &nbsp;and his
co-accused, I respectfully submit that the trial judge erred in convicting the
appellant because the prosecution failed to lead sufficient &nbsp;and compelling evidence to prove beyond all
reasonable doubt that the appellant and his co-accused concerted in the pursuit
of a common &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;object in
such a manner as to show that their actions must have been coordinated by</main>