Categories: Be the FIRST to KNOW

WHEN THE OFFENCE OF ARMED ROBBERY WILL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED

CASE TITLE: ADESINA v. STATE (2021) LPELR-54515(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 2^ND JUNE, 2021

PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE.

LEAD JUDGMENT: FOLASADE AYODEJI OJO, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION

This appeal borders on the Offences of Conspiracy to commit Armed Robbery and Armed Robbery.

FACTS

The Appellant and one Ridwan Ojekunle were charged before the trial Court on a two-count charge of armed robbery and conspiracy to commit armed robbery. The Appellant was accused of conspiring with his co-accused and others at large to rob one Taibat Adunni Orobiyi. The Appellant who was not physically present during the robbery was arrested during investigation. At the time of his arrest, some of the items stolen were recovered from his house. The Appellant pleaded not guilty to both counts of the charge. The case went on to trial. At the end of the trial, the learned trial Judge found the Appellant and his co-accused guilty on both counts of the charge, convicted them, and sentenced them accordingly. Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Court, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION

The Court determined the appeal on a lone issue thus:

Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution at the trial was sufficient to secure the conviction of the Appellant for the offence of Armed Robbery.

DECISION/HELD

In conclusion, the Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the High Court.

RATIOS:

CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF ARMED ROBBERY: Whether a toy gun is a firearm under the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act
CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF ARMED ROBBERY: Ingredients that must exist to prove the offence of armed robbery
CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF ARMED ROBBERY: When the offence of armed robbery/robbery with firearms will be deemed to have been committed
EVIDENCE – PROOF: Whether the fact that a witness gave his evidence in his native dialect is conclusive proof that he is illiterate; whether address of counsel can be relied on to prove illiteracy