EYO OKPO VS THE STATE - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

EYO OKPO VS THE STATE

O.K.O MOGAJI & ORS VS CADBURY FRY (EXPORT) LTD
August 26, 2025
TIJANI ADIGUN VS THE STATE
August 26, 2025
O.K.O MOGAJI & ORS VS CADBURY FRY (EXPORT) LTD
August 26, 2025
TIJANI ADIGUN VS THE STATE
August 26, 2025
Show all

EYO OKPO VS THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (1972) Legalpedia (SC) 11125

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Feb 4, 1972

Suit Number: SC. 196/1971

CORAM


LEWIS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

UDOMA JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

SOWEMIMO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


EYO OKPO APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant was found guilty by the trial court for the murder of Anwana Bassey, the appellant killed the deceased by inflicting matchet cut on the neck of the deceased. The appellant is challenging his conviction by the trial court on ground that the fact of his conviction was neither pronounced nor contained in the record of proceedings before the court.


HELD


The court held that once an accused has been found guilty of the offence charged, the proper way to convict him is to pronounce the sentence and indicate in the record of proceedings that the appropriate sentence prescribed by law for the offence has been passed.


ISSUES


Whether the failure of the learned trial judge to record in the record of proceeding and judgment of the court the fact that he had convicted as well as sentenced the Appellant to death as prescribed by law could invalidate the trial and sentence of the court in the case.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


PUNISHMENT FOR MURDER


it is plain that once a person has been found guilty of having committed the offence of murder, it is mandatory that he be sentenced to death. No other form of punishment can be inflicted. PER UDO UDOMA JSC


PROPER WAY TO INDICATE FACT OF CONVICTION


once an accused has been found guilty with the offence charged the proper way to indicate the fact of his conviction is to specifically record this in the proceeding to show that the appropriate sentence prescribed by law has in fact been passed or pronounced. PER UDO UDOMA JSC


CASES CITED


Mallam Gano v. The State SC. 182/1968

Mellor v. Swire (1885) 30 CH.D. 239: 53 LT 205


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Criminal Procedure Law (Cap. 31) of the Laws of the former Eastern Nigeria (1963) Vol. II

Supreme Court Act

England Supreme Court Rules


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.