Can a Person be Convicted on the Evidence/Confession of a Co-Accused?

CASE TITLE: NWEKE v. STATE (2025) LPELR-81073(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 26TH MARCH, 2025
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: OLASUMBO OLANREWAJU GOODLUCK, J.CA.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on criminal law and procedure.

FACTS:

This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court of Ebonyi State in the Ezza Judicial Division Holding at Onueke (trial Court).

The Appellant was charged as the first accused person under Section 1(1)(2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provision) Act Cap R11, Vol. Law of the Federation, 2004, at the trial Court. The Appellant pleaded not guilty. The matter proceeded to trial with two other co-accused persons. At the conclusion of the prosecution’s case, the Appellant raised a no-case submission, which was adjourned for ruling. The Appellant and the two co-accused subsequently readopted their no-case submission following the transfer of the trial Judge, D.O. Oko J., from the Ezza Judicial Division, where the case commenced, to the Ezzamgbo Judicial Division where D.O. Oko J. was transferred. There, both counsels readopted their arguments on the no-case submission. On the 31st of July, 2017, the learned trial Judge overruled the no-case submission and proceeded, in the same ruling, to order the conviction and sentence by hanging of the Appellant and the co-accused persons.

Aggrieved by the decision of the trial Court, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.

ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION:

The Appellant formulated a sole issue for determination:

“Whether from the totality of admissible evidence adduced at the trial Court, the prosecution successfully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt as required by law against the appellant.”

The Respondent formulated a sole issue for determination:

“Whether the prosecution proved the offence of Armed Robbery against the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt.”

The Court adopted the issues formulated by the parties.

DECISION/HELD:

In conclusion, the Court allowed the appeal.

RATIOS:

• APPEAL- GROUND(S) OF APPEAL: Effect of a ground of appeal from which no issue for determination is formulated
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- GUILT OF AN ACCUSED PERSON: How to establish/prove the guilt of an accused person
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF ROBBERY/ARMED ROBBERY: What must the prosecution prove to secure conviction for the offence of armed robbery
• EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/STANDARD OF PROOF: Burden and standard of proof on the prosecution to rebut the presumption of innocence of an accused person
• EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Whether the confessional statement of an accused is admissible against a co-accused who did not adopt the confessional statement
• EVIDENCE- HEARSAY EVIDENCE: Meaning of hearsay evidence; whether the court can rely on same
• EVIDENCE- EVIDENCE OF CO-ACCUSED PERSON: Whether a person can be convicted on the evidence/confession of a co-accused

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol