Why Did the Court Reduce Nana Agradaa’s Sentence?

When news broke that Patricia Asieduaa, popularly known as Nana Agradaa, had her sentence reduced on appeal, many people assumed something improper had happened. Others felt that perhaps the court had gone soft or bowed to public pressure. In the judgment itself, however, the judge made it clear that the decision was not based on any prophecy or public sentiment, but strictly on the facts and the law. So what really happened?

To understand the decision, it helps to know what an appeal is, what an appeal court is allowed to do, and why sentence reduction is sometimes the outcome.

What is an appeal?

An appeal is a request to a court to review a decision made by another court. In criminal cases, an appeal may be against a conviction (the pronouncement that a person is guilty of an offence) or against a sentence (the punishment imposed for the offence). In the Agradaa case, the appeal was against both her conviction and sentence.

An appeal always goes to a higher court. In this instance, the appellant was convicted by a Circuit Court and the appeal was heard by the High Court (Amasaman).

A criminal appeal may be filed by a person convicted or sentenced by a trial court, a person against whom an order has been made by a court in the course of a trial, or by the State where it disagrees with the outcome of a trial.

In determining an appeal, the appellate court works with the same trial record and asks whether the law was properly applied and whether the trial court’s outcome was fair and lawful. New evidence may be admitted, but only in very limited circumstances, for example, where the party seeking to introduce the evidence was genuinely unaware of its existence and could not, with reasonable diligence, have produced it at trial.

Does filing an appeal mean the person is innocent?

The answer is not always that simple. An appeal against conviction can succeed based on a technicality and that may not mean the appellant is innocent. An appeal against conviction can also succeed because the appellant was wrongly convicted.

A person may be rightly convicted and still succeed on an appeal against sentence. Conviction and punishment are related, but they are not the same thing. While many criminal appeals fail completely, some succeed only in relation to the sentence imposed.

What can a court do on appeal?

An appeal court may:

• Confirm a conviction and sentence
• Overturn a conviction
• Confirm an acquittal
• Overturn an acquittal
• Confirm the conviction but adjust the sentence upward or downward (for instance change a prison duration or a fine amount)
• Confirm the conviction but change the type of sentence (for instance from imprisonment to a fine)
• Change an order related to the appellant (for instance adjust or remove a compensation order)
• Order a retrial (that the trial should be held again)

Reducing a sentence is therefore not unusual. It is one of the recognised outcomes of an appeal.

Why would a court allow an appeal?

After hearing both sides, a court will allow a criminal appeal if the court considers that:

• the conviction or acquittal is unreasonable or cannot be supported by the evidence
• the trial judgment is based on a wrong application of the law or a wrong decision on a fact
• or that there was a miscarriage of justice

Why would a court reduce a sentence?

First, only two complainants testified, and the total amount proven was GH¢1,000. This did not make the offence trivial, but sentencing must still be proportionate to the facts that were proved. The appellant had also been earlier ordered by the trial court to refund the full amount to the complainants.

Some of the reasons used to determine the circumstances include the age of the convict, whether it is their first time offending, whether the convict showed remorse for their actions, the role the convict played, the number of victims involved, the manner in which the crime was committed, the commonness of the offence the convict committed (that offence is on the rise), and the type/extent of damage that their actions caused (for instance the amount lost by any victim or the severity of injury suffered by a victim).

Did the appeal court clear Nana Agradaa’s conviction?

No. The High Court affirmed all her three convictions. Every ground challenging the evidence, the trial process, and the fairness of the proceedings failed. The court was clear that the prosecution proved the offences beyond reasonable doubt. What changed was only the punishment, not the finding of guilt.

Why exactly was her sentence reduced?

The trial court had imposed a custodial sentence of 15 years imprisonment for defrauding by false pretences. On appeal, the High Court held that while the offence was serious, the sentence imposed was unusually harsh and excessive when all relevant factors were considered.

Several reasons informed that conclusion.

First, only two complainants testified, and the total amount proven was a total of GH¢1,000. This did not make the offence trivial, but sentencing must still be proportionate to the proven facts. Also, the appellant has been ordered to refund the amount (restitution).

Second, in Ghana, the offence of defrauding by false pretences does not have a minimum sentence. Judges therefore have discretion to determine an appropriate sentence, but that discretion must be exercised fairly, based on the circumstances of the case. It must not be exercised in a way that is excessively or disproportionately punitive.

Third, the appeal court disagreed with the trial court’s conclusion that the appellant showed no remorse at the trial.

Fourth, the record showed mitigation was offered, including reference to family circumstances, but these were not adequately reflected in the sentence.

Fifth, the trial court failed to account for time already spent in custody before sentencing. According to the appellant’s lawyer, she had spent 32 days in detention before her conviction.

Finally, the appeal court was of the view that the sentence focused too heavily on the personality of the offender rather than maintaining proportionality between deterrence, precedent, and the specific facts proved.

What did the court finally decide?

The High Court upheld all convictions, ordered full restitution/repayment to the complainants, and reduced the custodial sentence on two of the convictions to 12 months. The other conviction was a fine of 25 penalty units and in default 30 days imprisonment. This needed no adjustment.

The court also imposed fines of 200 penalty units (with one penalty unit being GH¢12), with an additional one-year custodial term in default of payment. All custodial sentences are to run concurrently, meaning they run at the same time rather than consecutively.

The new sentence takes effect from the date of conviction. This means the 12 months are counted from 3rd July 2025, the date on which the Circuit Court convicted the appellant.

Final note of acknowledgment

While the sentence was reduced on appeal, the convictions were affirmed in their entirety. This outcome underscores the work done at the investigative and trial stages by the Ghana Police Service, including Police Prosecutors, as well as the role of the Circuit Court. The State Attorneys commendably maintained the convictions through the appellate process. Appeals place cases under intense legal scrutiny, and the fact that the convictions withstood that scrutiny confirms that the prosecution was properly built and lawfully sustained.