CASE TITLE: AKINLEYE v. STATE (2024) LPELR-62541 (CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 12TH JULY, 2024
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: JOSEPH OLUBUNMI KAYODE OYEWOLE, J.C.A.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on the offence of murder.
FACTS:
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Ogun State, Ijebu-Ode Judicial Division sitting at Ijebu-Ode, Ogun State.
The Appellant was arraigned on one count charge of murder of her husband. The prosecution led evidence, which the trial court accepted, that consequent on a dispute between the appellant and the deceased, the appellant, after ensuring that she was alone in the house with the deceased, poured petrol on him where he sat and set him on fire. After that, she locked the front and back doors of the house and left. Neighbors broke the door and rescued the deceased, who was still alive but had suffered very severe burns. He was rushed to the hospital, where he died hours later while about to be moved to a bigger hospital he had been referred to. The deceased, however, repeatedly narrated to witnesses how the appellant set him on fire and eventually made a statement that was recorded in writing by the police before giving up the ghost. The appellant denied the allegation and gave evidence to that effect at trial.
After taking the final addresses of the respective counsel, the learned trial Judge in a considered judgment rejected the defence of the Appellant and found her guilty of the murder allegation. He then convicted and sentenced her to death by hanging.
In the exercise of her right of appeal, the Appellant appealed.
ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION:
The Court adopted the issues for determination formulated by the Appellant viz:
1. “Whether Court can base its decision on the medical report, purportedly written by someone, whose qualification and experience cannot be verified and whose whereabouts are not known, merely found attached to the case file and tendered by a police officer, who is not a medical doctor or pathologist, on the cause of death of the deceased.
2. Whether the trial Court was right to convict Appellant on the conflicting evidence of PW1, PW2, PW3, PW5 and exhibit B.
3. Whether the Court ought not to consider, in detail and in favour of the Appellant, the possibility of suicide and assassination and the defence of alibi and self defence.
4. Whether Appellant can be convicted of murder without the prosecution establishing the legal ingredients of mens rea and the actus reus of the offence.
5. Whether the Court ought not to consider and try Appellant on a lesser offence of manslaughter or attempted murder, based on the evidence before it.”
DECISION/HELD:
In conclusion, the Court dismissed the appeal.
RATIOS:
To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol
LawPavilion's attention has been drawn to a publication titled "Supreme Court Gives Landmark decisions on…
Introduction Acronyms and the legal profession are inseparable. Among the many facets of legal language,…
Introduction The legal industry is undergoing a significant transformation, driven by technological advancements. This shift…
CASE TITLE: OGIEFO v. HRH JAFARU & ORS (2024) LPELR-62942(SC)JUDGMENT DATE: 19TH JULY, 2024PRACTICE AREA:…
CASE TITLE: FBN PLC & ANOR v. BEN-SEGBA TECHNICAL SERVICES LTD & ANOR (2024) LPELR-62998(SC)JUDGMENT…
CASE TITLE: EFCC v. GOVT OF ZAMFARA STATE & ORS (2024) LPELR-62933(CA)JUDGMENT DATE: 20TH SEPTEMBER,…