CASE TITLE: ANIMASHAUN v. STATE (2024) LPELR-62550 (CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 12 JULY 2024
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: MUSLIM SULE HASSAN, J.C.A.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on the offences of conspiracy and armed robbery.
FACTS:
This is an appeal against the decision of High Court sitting in Sagamu, Ogun State, delivered by Hon. Justice E. O. Osinuga on the 10th day of July, 2017.
The Prosecution’s case at the trial Court which was presented basically by Afolabi Orekoya, PW1, who was the victim of armed robbery of a Toyota Camry at Ishara, was that he was dragged out of his car by the Appellant at gunpoint, and the gang of armed robbers collected his car and moved away. But because he knew the car had security and it would stop, he alerted the police who came and followed the direction the armed robbers followed.
PW1 stated that the police found his car abandoned on the road, close to Ago-Iwoye junction, and the next day, the police called him to identify his phone, which he did, and the accused was brought, amongst others, for an identification parade, and he identified the Appellant as the person who pulled him out of his car at gunpoint and drove his car away with the gang of thieves.
The case of the Appellant on the other hand, is that he is a motorcycle repairer, and he was given a job by one Ibrahim to repair his motorcycle, and he told Ibrahim that the repair would take two days. After two days, the motorcycle was not ready, but he told Ibrahim to come the next day. Then, when he travelled to get some spare parts in Lagos, Ibrahim called him to know where he was, but only for Ibrahim to appear with policemen, and he was arrested, brought to Sagamu, and kept in prison.
The Appellant was arraigned alone as Defendant before the trial Court on a four-count charge.
Upon the full prosecution of the case against the Appellant, he was convicted on three out of the four counts for which he was sentenced to death.
The Appellant, being aggrieved by the decision of the trial court, lodged this appeal against it with the Court of Appeal.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
In the determination of this appeal, the Court adopted the following issues:
1. Whether the conviction of the Appellant for the offences of Conspiracy and armed robbery is supported by the weight of evidence presented at the trial by the respondent.
2. Whether having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, the trial Court did not err in law when it admitted and relied on the alleged purported confessional statements credited to the Appellant without subjecting same to the validity tests laid down by law in convicting the Appellant for the offences of conspiracy and armed robbery.
3. Whether considering the evidence adduced at the trial by the Respondent’s witnesses, the purported identification parade done by PW3 was not a mere charade
DECISION/HELD:
In conclusion, the appeal was dismissed.
RATIOS:
- CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY: Meaning and nature of the offence of Conspiracy; how same can be established or proved
- CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY: Meaning of conspiracy; whether a single person can be convicted of conspiracy
- CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF ARMED ROBBERY: Ingredients that must exist to prove the offence of armed robbery; whether failure to tender the offensive weapon can result in the acquittal of the accused person
- CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- IDENTIFICATION PARADE: Meaning of Identification parade; Circumstances where an identification parade will be conducted
- EVIDENCE- UNCHALLENGED/UNCONTROVERTED EVIDENCE: Effect of unchallenged/uncontroverted evidence
- EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Meaning and nature of confession, conditions to be met before convicting on same and the tests for determining the veracity or otherwise of a confessional statement
- EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Appropriate time to object to the admissibility of a confessional statement; effect of failure
- EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Circumstances where objection to a confessional statement will fail
- EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Whether a court can convict solely on the confessional statement of an accused person
- POLICE- POLICE INVESTIGATION: Function of an Investigating Police Officer
To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol
