Whether Extra Judicial Statement of a Witness Is Only Admissible for The Purpose of Cross-Examination

CASE TITLE: Madoke v. STATE (2023) LPELR-60843(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 6TH JUNE, 2023
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: MOHAMMED AMBI-USI DANJUMA, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on Criminal Law and Procedure.

FACTS:
This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court of Justice sitting in Lafia, Nasarawa State, contained in the judgment delivered by Hon. Justice J.G. Abandaga, on March 20, 2017.

The case of the Appellant is that during a fight that ensued between the Appellant and the deceased, the Appellant, armed with a cutlass, cut the deceased, which led to the death of the deceased.

The case of the Respondent on the other hand, was that, on the 9th day of January 2012, a case of culpable homicide was reported at 10:30 hrs by one Adamu Madoke. Adamu Madoke (The Appellant) matcheted his brother, one Ahmadu Adamu, with a cutlass on his head and neck, which resulted in his death.

On receipt of the report, and in the course of investigation, himself, (PW1), and other police officers in his team went to the crime scene where they saw the dead body of the deceased and after taking photos of the corpse, they took the corpse to the Police station, Doma and thereafter to the hospital as the police routine for confirmation. The Defendant was not seen at the crime scene but on receipt of information of his whereabout, he was apprehended by the Investigating Police Officer and his team with the help of the Vigilante. They were taken by Appellant to his hideout where they were able to recover his belongings and the cutlass he used in mutilating his brother and was subsequently taken to the Police Station.

The Appellant was arraigned on a one count charge of culpable homicide, contrary to Section 221 of the Penal Code, the Appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge, and the case went into trial. At the end of the trial, the trial Court, found the Appellant guilty as per the charge, and sentenced him to death by hanging, hence this appeal.

ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION:
The appeal was determined on-

“Whether in view of the fact and circumstance of this case the trial Court was right to have found that prosecution had proven the offence of culpable homicide against the appellant.”

DECISION/HELD:
The appeal was dismissed.

RATIOS:
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – GUILT OF AN ACCUSED PERSON – How to establish/prove the guilt of an accused person
• EVIDENCE – CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – When a court will be held to have rightly relied on a confessional statement to convict an accused person
• EVIDENCE – CALLING OF WITNESS(ES) – Whether in a criminal trial, a host of witnesses is required by the prosecution to achieve a proof beyond reasonable doubt
• EVIDENCE – CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – Whether extra judicial statement of a witness is only admissible for the purpose of cross-examination

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