When an Appellate Court May Overturn or Modify a Sentence Imposed by a Trial Court

CASE TITLE: SAMUEL v. FRN (2024) LPELR-62854(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 5TH SEPTEMBER, 2024
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM SIRAJO, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on Criminal Law and Procedure.

FACTS:

The Appellant and one other, Olusegun Richard Ologbe, were the Defendants in Charge No. FHC/L/160C/2017 before the Lagos Division of the Federal High Court.

The facts of the case, as stated by the Respondent/Prosecution, were that the Appellant and 2 others, one at large, were engaging in fraudulent acts to obtain financial benefits, and thereby committed an offense contrary to obtaining financial benefits, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 27(b) of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Enforcement and Administration Act. 2015 and punishable under Sections 29 and 26 (2) of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Enforcement and Administration Act, 2015. The Appellant, same as his co-defendant in the trial Court, denied the allegation, maintaining that he only interacted with PW1 based on the Appellant’s line of business, as a Travelling Agent, at the instance of one Mr. Akinpelu, also called “Billion.”. The Court, however, found that the Prosecution could prove its case against the Appellant and the 2nd Defendant, and then convicted and sentenced them accordingly.

The Appellant was aggrieved by the said judgment of the trial Court and thereby initiated the instant appeal.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:

The Court determined the appeal on the following issues:

i. Whether the Court below was right to have convicted and sentenced the Appellant for the commission of the full offence based on the evidence before it.

ii. Whether failure of the trial Court to compute the period the Appellant spent in incarceration amounted to a miscarriage of justice.

DECISION/HELD:

In conclusion, the Court held that the sentence of 5 years imprisonment passed on the Appellant should be reduced to the maximum allowed for the offence of conspiracy, 30 months.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- SENTENCING- Circumstances under which an appellate Court will interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial Court
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- ATTEMPT TO COMMIT AN OFFENCE- Whether a person charged with an offence can be convicted of attempt to commit such an offence
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- AMENDMENT OF CHARGE- Whether a fresh plea must be made where there is an amendment to a charge; effect of failure to obtain a fresh plea
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- CONVICTION FOR LESSER OFFENCE- Whether a Court can convict an accused person of a lesser offence with which he was not charged; conditions to be fulfilled before an accused can be convicted for a lesser offence
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY- What amounts to conspiracy
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- SENTENCING- When does a sentence begin to run
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- SENTENCING- Whether the Court has discretion to determine the sentence to impose on a convicted accused person; instances when an appellate Court will interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial Court
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY- Punishment for the offence of conspiracy

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