ALAN WILLIAM HODGSON vs. THE REPUBLIC [2009]DLSC2476

Date	2009-07-15
Suit No.	CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. J3/1/2009
Citation No.	[2009]DLSC2476

DATE-BAH (DR.) JSC (PRESIDING)

ADINYIRA ((MRS) JSC

OWUSU (MS) JSC

DOTSE JSC

ANIN YEBOAH JSC.

THADDEUS SORY FOR THE APPELLANT

EVELYN KEELSON FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

[2009]DLSC2476
																																						<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" >ALAN WILLIAM HODGSON<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT]<o:p></o:p>CRIMINAL
APPEAL NO. J3/1/2009<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
15TH JULY, 2009.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>THADDEUS SORY FOR THE
APPELLANT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

EVELYN
KEELSON FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE-BAH
(DR.) JSC (PRESIDING), ADINYIRA ((MRS) JSC, OWUSU (MS) JSC, DOTSE JSC, ANIN
YEBOAH, JSC.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>J
U D G M E N T<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;OWUSU (MS), JSC:<o:p></o:p>Alan William Hodgson, the
Appellant herein, was arraigned before the High Court (Fast Track Division)
with five others on narcotic drug related offences under the Narcotic Drugs
(Control, Enforcement and Sanctions) Law, P. N. D. C. L 236.<o:p></o:p>The Appellant was charged
on two counts of engaging in criminal conspiracy to commit an offence relating
to Narcotic Drug and possessing Narcotic Drug without lawful authority contrary
to sections 56 (c) and 2 respectively of the Narcotic Drugs (Control,
Enforcement and Sanctions) Law of 1990, P. N. D. C. Law 236.<o:p></o:p>He pleaded not guilty to
both counts, was tried and found guilty.&nbsp;
He was convicted and sentenced to 20 years I. H. L on both counts.&nbsp; The sentences were however to run
concurrently.<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied with both the
conviction and sentence, he appealed to the Court of Appeal, which on 4th day
of November 2005 dismissed the appeal against both conviction and sentence.<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied with and
aggrieved by the Judgment of the Court of Appeal, pursuant to leave granted by
that Court, has appealed against that Judgment to this court for redress on the
following grounds:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>i.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “That the Court of Appeal did not
properly consider the objections raised by appellant as to the charges brought
against appellant.”<o:p></o:p>ii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “That the Court of Appeal failed to
properly evaluate the evidence which formed the basis for the conviction of
Appellant by the trial Court.” <o:p></o:p>iii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “The dismissal by the Court of Appeal of
appellant’s appeal was unreasonable and occasioned appellant a substantial
miscarriage of justice.”<o:p></o:p>iv.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “That the Court of Appeal and the trial
Court failed to give adequate and proper consideration to appellant’s defence.”<o:p></o:p>v.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “That the Court of Appeal ought to have
mitigated the sentence imposed on appeal by the trial Court.”<o:p></o:p>In short, the Appellant is
before this Court because, according to his counsel, there was no evidence to
support the conviction and that even where the prosecution tried to link
Appellant to the charges for which he was convicted, there was enough evidence
to prove that the evidence was completely unreliable because same was either
contradictory or that other pieces of evidence adduced at the trial proved the
evidence not to be credit worthy.<o:p></o:p>Counsel submitted that the
Appellant is an unfortunate victim of circumstances because his presence in the
house of 1st Accused where the narcotic substances were found was fortuitous. <o:p></o:p>The five grounds set down
in the Notice of Appeal were thereafter argued as filed.<o:p></o:p>On the first ground of
Appeal, counsel admitted that it is not the strongest point of the appeal.&nbsp; He however deemed it fit to argue same first
as filed.&nbsp; In doing so, the charges
levelled against Appellant were set out for purposes of demonstrating how
defective the charge of conspiracy is.&nbsp;
The charge was reproduced as below:<o:p></o:p>“ STATEMENT OF OFFENCE:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ENGAGING IN CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT
AND (SIC) OFFENCE RELATING TO NARCOTIC (SIC) DRUG CONTRARY TO SECTION 56(c) OF
THE NARCOTIC DRUGS (CONTROL, ENFORCEMENT AND SANCTIONS) LAW, P. N. D. C. L 236.<o:p></o:p>PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE:&nbsp;&nbsp; KEVIN DINSDALE GORMAN, Mohammed Ibrahim
Kamil, John David Logan, FRANK DAVID LAVERICK, Allan William Hodgson and Sven
Leonhard between September 2003 and 7th January, 2004 in Spain, United Kingdom
and Tema – Ghana engaged in criminal conspiracy to commit an offence relating
to narcotic drug.”<o:p></o:p>It is the submission of
counsel that the charge as reproduced does not disclose the specific nature of
the Crime or the particular narcotic drug offence of which there was a criminal
conspiracy to commit. Failure to state the particular narcotic drug offence in
respect of which the Appellant and the others conspired to commit rendered the
charge defective.<o:p></o:p>Dealing with the charge of
conspiracy which according to counsel is defective, We deemed it appropriate to
refer to the facts of the case upon which the charge was based.&nbsp;&nbsp; According to the prosecution, on 07/01/04,
the Appellant together with the other accused persons was arrested in the house
of the 1st accused person, Kevin Dinsdale German at Tema where parcels of a
whitish substance suspected to be cocaine was found.&nbsp; Before the arrest, the Narcotic Board in
Ghana had received reports from International sister Agencies concerning
narcotic drugs as a result of which the Narcotic Control Board </main>