CASE TITLE: ORI v. STATE (2025) LPELR-82011(SC)
JUDGMENT DATE: 4TH JUNE, 2025
PRACTICE AREA: EVIDENCE
LEAD JUDGMENT: MOHAMMED BABA IDRIS, J.S.C.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on the Offence of Armed Robbery.
FACTS:
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal Coram: A. O. Lokulo-Sodipe, I. G. Mbaba and I. A. Anden HOW/ART/21/99, yangtso, JJCA, delivered on 10/3/2020, wherein the Court below dismissed the Appellant’s Appeal and affirmed the decision of the trial Court in charge No: HOW/ART/21/99 delivered on 20/6/2005 by A. O. H. Ukachukwu, J.
On 17th March, 1998, the Appellant and three co-defendants (others are at large) along Mgbee Orlu/Ideato North Road, whilst armed with firearms, robbed one Mr. John Nwokeocha of the sum of Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Naira (N7,800.00) and other passengers travelling from Orlu to Lafia in a Mercedes 911 Lorry with Registration No. AE 281 RLU of their monies totalling the sum of Two Hundred and Sixty Thousand, Seven Hundred and Fifteen Naira only (N260,715.00).
Upon arraignment at the trial Court, the Appellant pleaded not guilty. The prosecution, in proof of its case, called six (6) witnesses, while the Appellant testified for himself and called no witnesses. At the close of trial, the learned trial Judge A. O. H. Ukachukwu, J., on 20/6/2005, found the appellant guilty, and he was subsequently convicted and sentenced to death by hanging. Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Court, the appellant appealed to the Court below but was unsuccessful in his appeal, as the Court of Appeal on 10/3/2020 affirmed the judgment of the trial Court. Still dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, the Appellant has lodged an appeal to the Supreme Court.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
The Court determined the appeal on these issues, thus:
1. Whether the extrajudicial statement of then Appellant that is, Exhibits G, H, L, M and N, qualifies as a confessional statement and whether the Court below was right when it held that the principle of non-est factum would appear not to avail the Appellant in the instant case.
2. Whether the Appellant was a party to the offence and whether the defence of alibi avails the Appellant.
3. Whether the lower Court duly considered the material contradictions and inconsistencies complained of by the Appellant in the prosecution’s case and arrived at its decision that they are not material to be fatal to the prosecution’s case.
4. Whether the lower Court was right when it upheld the conviction of the Appellant for the offence of Armed Robbery and sentenced him to death despite the fact that the investigating officer testified in Court that the Appellant was not part of the gang.
5. Whether Exhibits “E” and “J” are exculpatory evidence in favour of the Appellant and should be in favour of the Appellant.
DECISION/HELD:
In the final analysis, the appeal was dismissed.
RATIOS:
- CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- DEFENCE/PLEA OF ALIBI: Whether defence of alibi must fail once an accused is fixed to the scene of crime
- CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF ROBBERY/ARMED ROBBERY: Whether an accused person aiding and abetting or found in the company of others armed will be guilty of the offence of armed robbery
- CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF ROBBERY/ARMED ROBBERY: Ingredients that must exist to prove the offence of armed robbery
- EVIDENCE- EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE: Whether evaluation of evidence and ascription of probative value is a primary function of the trial Court; duty of the Court of Appeal as it relates to same
- EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Nature of a statement that will constitute confessional statement
To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol
