–
ESSIEN AKPAN ESSIEN
V.
THE KING
THE WEST AFRICA COURT OF APPEAL, HOLDEN AT LAGOS, NIGERIA
25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1950
2PLR/1950/26 (WACA)
–
OTHER CITATION(S)
2PLR/1950/26 (WACA)
(1950) XIII WACA PP. 6 – 7
LEX (1950) – XIII WACA 6 – 7
–
BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS:
VERITY, C.J., NIGERIA
RHODES, J.
BAIRAMIAN J.
–
BETWEEN:
ESSIEN AKPAN ESSIEN – Appellant
AND
THE KING – Respondent
–
ORIGINATING COURT(S)
West African Court of Appeal, CR. APP. 3138
REPRESENTATION
Lloyd, Crown Counsel — for the Respondent
–
ISSUE(S) FROM THE CAUSE(S) OF ACTION
CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – FORGED CURRENCY NOTE:- Reference to the West African Court of Appeal by the Governor under section 23 of the West African Court of Appeal Ordinance (Cap 229) – Plea of guilty of forged currency note – Subsequent proof that currency note genuine Reference to Court to hear and determine as an Appeal – Power of Court to entertain appeal on plea of guilty.
–
CASE SUMMARY
The appellant had pleaded guilty to having in his possession, without lawful authority or excuse, a forged currency note contra to section 9(2)(d) of the West African Currency Notes Ordinance. After conviction it was represented to the Governor by the Attorney-General that the note found in possession of the appellant was a genuine note and the Governor referred the case to this Court.
The appellant was not represented, but Crown Counsel obtained leave in the interests of Justice to call evidence to establish the genuineness of the currency note. The evidence led left it in doubt whether the genuine note was, in fact, the one found in possession of appellant. However, a reasonable doubt existed.
–
DECISION(S) FROM THE WEST AFRICAN COURT OF APPEAL
Held (Appeal allowed) that:
1. The Court can entertain an appeal where upon the admitted facts the appellant could not in law be convicted of the offence charged.
2. There was a reasonable doubt which must be resolved in favour of the appellant.
3. It must be assumed that the note found in possession of the appellant was genuine and he could not be in law guilty of the offence charged. The conviction and sentence were set aside and a verdict of acquittal entered.
Case referred to:
(1) Rex v. Forde (1923), 2 K.B., at 403.
–
–
MAIN JUDGMENT
The following Judgment was delivered:
VERITY, C.J.
This is a case referred to this Court by the Governor under section 23 of the West African Court of Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 229).
The circumstances are peculiar. The convicted person, who must be treated for the purposes of this case as an appellant, was charged with having in his possession without lawful authority or excuse, a forged currency note contrary to section 9(2)(d) of the West African Currency Notes Ordinance. To this charge he pleaded guilty. It was subsequently represented to the Governor on the petition of the Attorney General that the note found in the possession of the appellant was, in fact, a genuine note, and the Governor thereupon referred the case to this Court to be heard and determined as in the case of an appeal by a person convicted.
The appellant is unrepresented, but Crown Counsel in the interest of Justice, obtained leave to call certain witnesses in order to establish that the note to which the charge relates is, in fact, a genuine note.
In the first place, it is necessary to determine whether this Court will entertain an appeal where the appellant pleaded guilty in the Court below in such circumstances. In Rex v. Forde (1923) (1), Avery, J., in reading the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal, laid down the rule that-
“a plea of guilty having been recorded, this Court can only entertain an appeal against conviction if it appears (1) that the appellant did not appreciate the nature of the charge or did not intend to admit he was guilty of. it or (2) that upon the admitted facts he could not in law have been convicted of the offence charged.”
The present case clearly does not fall within the first class of case to which his Lordship referred, for the record before us discloses not only that the appellant appreciated the nature of the charge, but that he believed himself to have been guilty of it, having been under the impression that the note was in fact, forged.
In regard to the second class of case, however, if the evidence now before us establishes that the note is, in fact, genuine, then it must be taken that upon the facts so established and admitted by the Crown the appellant could not in law have been convicted of the offence charged.
The evidence adduced before us was intended to show that the note found in the possession of the appellant was a genuine note. In point of fact, it clearly established that the note produced before us from the custody of the Police is a genuine note, but it fell short of establishing conclusively that the note so produced was the note found in the possession of the appellant, there being no means, as it would appear, by which the identity of that note can be conclusively established. The nature of the evidence, however, whether or not the identity of the note is conclusively proved, does give rise to a grave doubt as to whether the note found in the possession of the appellant was not a genuine note in as much as if the note produced before us is the note found in his possession, which we are unable to determine beyond doubt, then it is not a forged note. This doubt we must resolve in favour of the appellant, and in accordance with the submissions now put forward by the Crown. In these circumstances it must be assumed that the note found in the possession of the appellant was a genuine note and that he could not in law be found guilty of the offence charged in relation to his possession thereof.
The appeal is therefore allowed, the conviction is quashed, the sentence set aside and a verdict of acquittal entered.
Appeal allowed.
–