KWAKU ASANTE vs THE REPUBLIC [2021]DLCA16063

Date	2021-10-04
Suit No.	CRIMINAL APPEA NO: H2/17/2021
Citation No.	[2021]DLCA16063

SOWAH J. A. (PRESIDING)

OPPONG J. A.

MENSAH-HOMIAH J. A.

DICKSON DONKOR

[2021]DLCA16063
																																						<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" >KWAKU ASANTE<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>&nbsp;<div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

CRIMINAL APPEA NO: H2/17/2021&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: 4TH OCTOBER 2021<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>SOWAH
J. A. (PRESIDING), OPPONG J. A., MENSAH-HOMIAH J. A.<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
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>MENSAH-HOMIAH,
JA:<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;, serif; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">This is an appeal against the 12 years consecutive
sentences imposed on Appellant for the offence of defilement, by the Circuit
Court, Mpraeso. His appeal against sentence to the High Court, Nsawam, was
dismissed.<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;, serif; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">In his further appeal to this court for
mitigation of sentence, the appellant contends that he is a first offender and
regrets his actions. He argues that the sentence is too harsh and that the
trial court failed to take into account mitigating factors which inured to his benefit.<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;, serif; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Responding to the arguments put forward by the appellant,
the learned Assistant State Attorney (ASA) makes a very important observation
regarding the procedure adopted by the trial court. The learned ASA submits thus:<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;, serif; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">“...the
Respondent respectfully wishes to comment on the procedure adopted by the
Honourable Trial Court Judge in convicting ad sentencing the Appellant. It is
noted from the record of appeal that the Appellant was convicted after his
“admission” of the offence during cross-examination of PW1. However, the
appellant had not made a request to change his plea at that point. Despite
this, after conviction, the Appellant was said to have maintained that he was
guilty of the offence when asked whether he stood by his plea by the Court”<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;, serif; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;"><o:p></o:p><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;, serif; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">I perfectly agree with the learned ASA that there
was a procedural blunder at the trial Circuit Court. Although this appeal is
against sentence, I find it necessary to touch on this procedural gaffe.<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;, serif; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Quite clearly, the trial fell short of the
requirements of sections 172 to 174 of the Criminal and Other Offences
Procedure Act, 1960 (Act 30) which spells out the
procedure to be followed when an accused person pleads “not guilty”. These
provisions state as follows:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 36pt; line-height: 115%; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">“172. &nbsp; Procedure
on plea of not guilty<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 72pt; text-align: justify; line-height: 115%; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">(1) Where the accused does not plead
guilty to the charge, the Court shall proceed to hear the evidence that the
prosecutor adduces in support of the charge.<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 72pt; text-align: justify; line-height: 115%; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">(2) The accused or the counsel of the
accused may put questions to each witness produced against the accused.<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 72pt; text-align: justify; line-height: 115%; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; backgrou</main>