RICHMOND JARRETT, Appellant, v. REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA, Appellee.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, MONTSERRADO COUNTY. Argued April 15, 1964. Decided May 22, 1964. An appeal from a judgment of conviction of embezzlement will be dismissed where appellant’s counsel stipulate that, upon re-examination of the record, they have found no reason for disturbing the judgment appealed from and that they join the prosecution in asking that the judgment be affirmed. Appellant, who had been indicated, tried and convicted of embezzlement, perfected an appeal to the Supreme Court on a five-count bill of exceptions. Subsequently appellant’s counsel requested the Court to affirm the judgment from. The Court dismissed the appeal. Mom olu S. Cooper and Richard A. Diggs for appellant. Attorney General J. Dossen Richards for appellee. MR. JUSTICE WARDSWORTH delivered the opinion of the court. During the August term, 1962, of the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit, Montserrado County, the present appellant, Richmond Jarrett, was duly arraigned, tried and convicted of the crime of embezzlement. Not being satisfied with the final judgment rendered against him on September 12, 1962, he entered exceptions on the record of the court and prayed an appeal to this Court of last resort for review and final disposition of said cause. Appellant having perfected his appeal within statutory time, the cause was placed on the docket of this 56 LIBERIAN LAW REPORTS 57 Court for hearing. At the call of said matter for hearing, his counsel made the following record : “Counsel for appellant beg to submit that they have re-examined the records of the trial in the court below and conscientiously have found no legal reasons to upset the verdict and the judgment of the trial court. In this respect, and in fairness to the prosecution, beg to submit to the soundness of the verdict and the judgment of the court below; hence, concede the legal correctness of said final judgment, and therefore join the prosecution in asking for the affirmation of the judgment in the court below, and submitted.” The Attorney General, perhaps being agreeably surprised at the gentlemanly attitude assumed by counsel representing appellant, expressed his congratulations to the said counsel for having conceded the legal soundness of the verdict and judgment of the lower court, and submitted. Although appellant submitted a bill of exceptions containing five counts in this case, as the legal basis of his appeal, we find no necessity for exploring the said five counts as laid in the bill of exceptions or expatiating on any of the legal phases involved. Therefore, in view of the circumstances surrounding this case, that is to say, counsel for appellant having submitted to the soundness of the verdict and the judgment of the court below, and having conceded the legal correctness of said final judgment, and having also joined the prosecution in asking for the affirmance of the judgment of the court below, this court hereby sustains the position taken by appellant’s counsel and affirms the judgment of the court below. And it is hereby so ordered. Affirmed.