ABUBAKARI GERO vs. THE REPUBLIC [2016]DLCA8448

Date	2016-02-10
Suit No.	SUIT NO: H2/10/2016
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA8448

ADJEI JA – PRESIDING

MRS. SOWAH JA

MENSAH JA

FRANCIS POLLEY ESQ. FOR THE ACCUSED PERSON/APPELLANT

MRS. EMILY ADDO-OKYIRE CSA FOR THE REPUBLIC/RESPONDENT

[2016]DLCA8448
																																						<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" >ABUBAKARI GERO<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>[COURT OF
APPEAL, KOFORIDUA]<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">

SUIT
NO: H2/10/2016&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:
10TH FEBRUARY, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>FRANCIS
POLLEY ESQ. FOR THE ACCUSED PERSON/APPELLANT <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">

MRS.
EMILY ADDO-OKYIRE CSA FOR THE REPUBLIC/RESPONDENT <o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<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">

ADJEI
JA – PRESIDING, MRS. SOWAH JA, MENSAH JA<o:p></o:p>

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

</div>ADJEI, J.A:<o:p></o:p>The Appellant herein was the 3rd Accused
person in the suit tried by the High Court, Kumasi which all of the three (3) Accused
persons were convicted for conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery contrary to
Section 23 (1) and 149 of Act 29 as amended by Act 646 and Section 149 of Act
29 as amended by Act 646 respectively. The trial High Court judge sentenced
each of the Accused persons to a term of twenty one (21) years on both Counts which
were to run concurrently. Even though the accused persons were convicted and
sentenced to a term of 21 years on 23rd April, 2009, the sentence
was to take retrospective effect from 13th August, 2005, that is,
the day that the accused persons were arrested by the police for having
committed the offence of conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery.<o:p></o:p>The brief facts of the case as presented by the
prosecution before the trial High Court were that on 13th August,
2005, a 207 Benz Bus with the registration number AS 8174 was being driven by
one Kwasi Brenya towards Ejura. Just before River Afram and between Ejura and
Yeji motorway, there were some logs in the middle of the road implanted by the
accused persons to prevent vehicles from crossing the river. The said Kwasi
Brenya, however, ran into the logs placed on the road by the accused persons
and veered off the road into a ditch when it was raining. Immediately it went
into the ditch, a group of people numbering about eight including the accused
persons emerged from the bush. They were armed with guns and knives and used
them to attack the passengers in the Benz Bus. They robbed the passengers
various sums of monies and their mobile phones. Another three (3) vehicles were
also entrapped by the accused persons and their accomplices by the logs they
used to block the road. They robbed all the passengers on board in the other
three (3) vehicles of their monies and mobile phones. The accused persons and
their accomplices went to Ebenezer Hotel at Yeji to share the booty from the
robbery. The police were informed by an informant and finally arrested the
accused persons. The Police found on them some mobile phones which some of the
victims identified as theirs. They further found wet currency notes packed in
small quantities and that also implicated them to the crime because it was
raining at the time they robbed the passengers of their properties.<o:p></o:p>The accused persons pleaded “Not Guilty” to both offences. Evidence was adduced and after the
trial, all of them were convicted. The 3rd accused person; the
appellant herein now appeals to this Court against the sentence. The appellant
filed one ground of appeal. It reads as follows:<o:p></o:p>“The
sentence imposed on the appellant is harsh in view of the circumstances
surrounding the case, hence his plea for reduction of sentence”.<o:p></o:p>We are of the opinion that Judges should evaluate
audience on record, where the parties proffered evidence and give reasons why
the evidence of a party is preferable to the other one. After the parties had
adduced evidence, the trial High Court Judge gave his decision as follows:<o:p></o:p>“BY
COURT: After evaluating the evidence in
this trial I do find all the accused persons guilty of the offence of
Conspiracy contrary to Section 23 (1) and robbery contrary to Section 149 of
Act 29. Each accused is accordingly convicted”.<o:p></o:p>We are of the opinion that the trial High Court Judge
arrived at a right conclusion. However, it was not right for him not to
evaluate the evidence on record, make proper findings of fact and arrive at a
fair conclusion. Any Judge who gives a judgment based on the evidence on record
is enjoined by law to evaluate the evidence, make findings of fact and assign
reasons why he prefers the evidence of a party to the other. He must support
his findings with relevant statutes and judicial decisions. A party who is
either convicted or acquitted must appreciate the reasons for his acquittal or
conviction. <o:p></o:p>