Duty of an Accused Who Desires to Impeach His Confessional Statement

CASE TITLE: ADEYEMI v. STATE (2022) LPELR-57342(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 7TH APRIL, 2022

PRACTICE AREA: EVIDENCE (CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT)

LEAD JUDGMENT: MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM SIRAJO, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on Criminal Law and Procedure.

FACTS:

The Appellant was arraigned before the High Court of Ogun State, Ota Judicial Division on a four-count Information dated 24th March 2014.

The gist of the prosecution’s case at the trial Court was that on 23/10/2011 around 7.00 pm, the Appellant and another person entered the shop of one Alhaja Olayinka Ogunyale who runs a supermarket at Idiroko Road, Paplo Area, Atan, Ota, and requested to buy table water. As she opened the refrigerator to give them water, they both pulled out guns. While one of them was searching the drawers, the other one asked her son, Ayomide, to kneel down. They collected her gold neck chain valued at N50,000.00 and packed all the proceeds of the day’s sales from the drawer, the sum of N20,000.00 that was wrapped and her Samsung mobile phone with GLO line. While the person with Alhaja Olayinka Ogunyale ran away with the items, her son summoned courage, grabbed the gun with the Appellant and that gave her the opportunity to hold onto the Appellant and squeezed his testicles, which led to his falling down. The Appellant was then arrested and taken to Atan Police Station.

The Appellant’s case, on the other hand, is two-fold. The first, as stated in his extra-judicial statement to the Police is that he committed the offences charged together with Taofeek and Gbenga whom he carried on his Motorcycle to the shop of the nominal complainant. He stated that each of the three of them had a gun and that the three guns were brought by Gbenga. While Gbenga fired his own gun and exhausted his cartridges, the Appellant’s gun failed him. Taofeek and Gbenga ran away while the Appellant was caught. The second leg of the Appellant’s case is as stated in his evidence before the trial Court as follows: He is a commercial Motorcyclist. He carried two people to Atan Ota on Sunday, 03/10/2011. On getting to Atan, near the road, the two passengers robbed him of his motorcycle at gunpoint and he started shouting ‘thief, thief. He was accused of being one of those who robbed the nominal complainant. He denied being one of the robbers, asserting that he was also a victim of a robbery.

He was charged and convicted for the offences of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and various acts of armed robbery. Miffed by his conviction and sentence, he has appealed to the Court of Appeal.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:

The appeal was determined on the following issues:

A. Whether there was a breach of the right of fair hearing of the Appellant at the hearing in the lower Court.

B. Whether from the weight of the evidence adduced, the prosecution can establish the essential elements of the offence for which the Appellant was charged.

C. Whether having regard to the evidence adduced by the Respondent before the trial Court, their case was proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

DECISION/HELD:

The appeal was unanimously dismissed.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF ARMED ROBBERY: Meaning and ingredients of the offence of armed robbery
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – GUILT OF AN ACCUSED PERSON: Requirement(s) of law on proof of guilt of an accused person
• JUDGMENT AND ORDER – JUDGMENT OF COURT: Effect of judgment of Court entered in favor/against a dead person
• EVIDENCE – CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Position of the law where an accused person fails to object to the admission of his extra-judicial statement but retracts it during trial
• EVIDENCE – CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Duty of an accused who desire to impeach his statement; effect of failure