CASE TITLE: ALI v. STATE (2024) LPELR-62370(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 14TH JUNE, 2024
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: ITA GEORGE MBABA, J.C.A.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on criminal law and procedure.
FACTS:
This appeal emanated from the judgment of Adamawa State High Court, delivered by Hon. Justice Abdulazeez Waziri on 7th November 2020, wherein the learned trial Judge convicted the appellant (as defendant) for offences of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and for the actual commission of the offence of armed robbery and sentenced him, accordingly.
The appellant and the other two defendants (said to be at large) were arrested by the police, following a tip-off by an informant, shortly after a robbery incident, where PW1, Elisheba Zailani (or Jelani) was robbed, at gunpoint and her car, Toyota Starlet, snatched by a gang of three armed robbers. The appellant was identified as one of the robbers by the PW1. They fired gunshots at the scene and sped off with her car and other valuables. With the information received by the police, the three robbers were apprehended the next day and the vehicle recovered in the vehicle was the gun the robbers used and some bullets. The gun was a pump action rifle (not an AK47), which PW1 thought it was. On being arrested, the robbers took the police to the house of the PW1, who identified them and her vehicle. She also gave the police an empty shell of the cartridge which the robbers fired at the time of the robbery.
The appellant pleaded “Not Guilty” to the charge, upon being arraigned at the trial Court, after a series of adjournments, the prosecution brought an application to strike out the names of the two defendants, namely: Nura Gadas and Saminu Inuwa Yaro, now at large. The application was unopposed and was granted as prayed.
After hearing the case and considering the evidence and addresses of counsel, the trial Court found the appellant and the other defendants guilty and was sentenced to death, by hanging.
Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Court, the appellant appealed against same.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
The Court determined the appeal based on a sole issue, thus:
“Was the trial Court right to convict the Appellant on the basis of the evidence adduced, including the confessional statement admitted, after overruling objection to it?”
DECISION/HELD:
In the final analysis, the appeal was dismissed. Consequently, the decision of the trial Court was affirmed.
RATIOS:
- APPEAL- REPLY BRIEF: Purpose of a reply brief; whether a reply brief is meant to re-argue the case of the appellant
- APPEAL- UNAPPEALED FINDING(S)/DECISION(S): Effect of failure to appeal against the finding(s) of a Court
- EVIDENCE- PROOF: Ways of proving the commission of a crime
- EVIDENCE- PROOF: Effect when the three modes/ways of establishing/proving commission of a crime coalesce
- EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Whether confession is the best form of evidence in a criminal trial; whether it is sufficient alone to sustain a conviction
- EVIDENCE- CONTRADICTION IN EVIDENCE: Whether minor contradiction in the evidence of witnesses can be fatal to a case
- EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Whether any other police officer other than the recorder of the confessional statement can tender it at the trial
- EVIDENCE- DOCTRINE OF RECENT POSSESSION: The presumption of the law where a stolen property is found in possession of a person immediately/soon after a theft
To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol
