The appellant, George Nnane, appealed his convictions for two counts of fraud, alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
The Court of Appeal found that trial counsel's performance fell below the standard of reasonable professional judgment, specifically by failing to adequately cross-examine a key witness, projecting disbelief of the appellant's testimony during examination-in-chief, and delivering an ineffective jury address.
Despite a strong Crown case, the court concluded that the cumulative effect of counsel's conduct undermined the fairness of the trial.
The conviction appeal was allowed, the convictions were set aside, and a new trial was ordered.
The sentence appeal was not addressed.
