REPUBLIC VRS. KANOR (D10/34/20) [2024] GHACC 18 (23 January 2024)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT “A”, TEMA, HELD ON TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2024, BEFORE HER HONOUR AGNES OPOKU-BARNIEH, CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE SUIT NO. D10/34/20 THE REPUBLIC VRS. MARVIN NENE KANOR CONVICT PRESENT INPS. EMMANUEL ASANTE HOLDING THE BRIEF OF C/INSP. SUSANA AKPEERE FOR PROSECUTION PRESENT NO LEGAL REPRESENTATION SENTENCING This Court, on 27th December 2023, gave judgment in this case and convicted the convict herein on a charge of defilement contrary to Section 101(2) of the Criminal Offences Act 1960. During the pre-sentencing hearing, the prosecution informed the court that the victim, after testifying in the matter passed on and that the complainant, the father of the victim had communicated this to her on the phone and that she suspects that the death was linked to the defilement in this case. The court therefore deferred sentencing to receive evidence on the alleged death and the cause of death of the victim in this case. The court therefore issued a subpoena for the complainant to appear in court given the submissions by the prosecution that the complainant has subsequently declined to appear in court. The whereabouts of the complainant are still not known and the Court is disabled from independently verifying these facts under the circumstances. There being no evidence of the death of the victim and the cause of death before the court, the court shall refrain from considering same as an aggravating factor. 1 In sentencing the convict, the court considers both mitigating and aggravating factors. The court considers the plea in mitigation of the sentence put forth by the accused person. The court further considers the youthful age of the accused person which at the time of the commission of the offence in January 2020, was nineteen (19) years, and the age of the victim at the time of the alleged incident, was thirteen years. The prosecution also informs the Court that the convict has a previous conviction for defilement and is currently serving the sentence and prays the court to consider his previous conviction in imposing the sentence. Under Section 300 of the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) a previous conviction of a convict may be considered in opposing a sentence as provided in the said section. In the Practice Note contained in the case of Blackie v. The state (Practice Note) [1962] 2 GLR 2019, SC, Van Lare JSC (as he then was) clarified what amounts to a previous conviction and stated that a previous conviction is one in respect of which the prisoner had already suffered punishment before committing a later offence. Thus, the Court cannot take the previous conviction of the accused person into consideration to impose a Section 300 of Act 30 punishment in imposing the sentence since he has not completed the sentence though it may be considered as an aggravating factor. The accused person also, in respect of this case, spent some time in custody before becoming a convict on trial due to his previous conviction. Thus, in accordance with Article 14(6) of the 1992 Constitution, time spent in custody pending trial is considered. The court also takes into consideration the pain and trauma the accused person subjected the victim to and the threat of death to the victim. The court considers the impact of the defilement on the health of the victim. I therefore 2 sentence the accused person to serve a term of imprisonment of Eighteen (18) years in hard labour. H/H AGNES OPOKU-BARNIEH (CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE) SGD. 3