Tesha Miller’s attorney accuses Crown of abuse of power
ATTORNEY-AT-LAW ISAT Buchanan, who is representing incarcerated reputed gangster Tesha Miller, is accusing the Crown of abusing its power in light of fraud charges laid against the convicted killer which stem from an incident in 2017 in which he was charged and fined $100.
Consequently, Buchanan is to make an application for an abuse of process in the Kingston and St Andrew Parish Court on July 29, asking the court to dismiss the charges against his client, as it constitutes an abuse of the court’s process.
Miller, who is currently serving a life sentence for accessory before the fact to murder and accessory after the fact to murder, was charged with cheating the public revenue, possession of forged documents and conspiracy days after his sentence was handed down in the high court last January.
He has been accused of having an expired driver’s licence in the name Marlon Williams as well as a birth certificate bearing the same name, but Miller is contending that he has never seen those documents and that they were created while he was out of the country.
The fraud charges originated from the 2017 incident in which Miller was arrested and charged for making a false declaration, after he signed his name as Marlon Williams on a document at the Norman Manley International Airport on April 4, following his deportation from the Bahamas.
However, he subsequently pleaded guilty and was ordered to pay a fine of $100 which had sparked outrage and widespread criticism of the country’s outdated legislation. The fines have since been updated.
Meanwhile, Miller’s attorney appeared in court yesterday to make the application but it was delayed after the prosecutor from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions indicated that the Crown was not in a position to respond and asked for the matter to be rescheduled.
Miller who appeared in court was remanded by Chief Parish Judge Chester Crooks.
Buchanan told The Gleaner that he will be making an application under Section 16 (9) of the Constitution which states that no person should be tried for the same offence twice or for offences that could have been brought at the time of that particular offence.
He is contending that would be a breach of his client’s right and abuse of process for him to be prosecuted on those charges, which could have been brought from 2017 when he had pleaded guilty.