CORAM

PARTIES

ISIKILU OLANIPEKUN APPELLANTS

THE STATE

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant as the 4th accused person was arraigned with 3 others for the offence of conspiracy and armed robbery contrary to Sections 5(b) and 1(2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act Cap.38 Vol. XXII Laws of the Federation 1990 at the High Court of Justice, Ogun State. It was the Prosecution’s case that on 18th August, 2002 at about 3.30 am, the Appellant in company of three others armed with guns and cutlasses broke into the apartment of Evangelist Oluseye Ogunremi who testified as PW2 and demanded for money. In the course of the robbery operation, the Appellant hit PW2 with an iron on the head and subsequently ordered him to lie with his face down on the floor. After the robbery operation, PW2 discovered that the sum of N800.00, a Nokia and Sagem handsets were missing. On 19th of August, 2002 the 1st accused went to PW1 and tried to dispose off the handsets to him. When the 1st accused could not produce the purchase receipts for the handsets, PW1 arranged for his arrest upon receipt of information on the robbery that took place. The 1st accused made some statements to the Police and this led to the arrest of the other three accused persons and the recovery of two locally made single barrel shot guns in an uncompleted building.  The 4th accused person’s statement was made and recorded in Pidgin English which statement was tendered in evidence without any objection and was admitted as Exhibit D. The learned trial Judge held that the prosecution proved its case against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt and therefore sentenced each of them to death by hanging for the offence of armed robbery but stayed the sentence on the 1st count which was for conspiracy. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal, Ibadan which dismissed the appeal. Further aggrieved, the Appellant has appealed to the Court of Appeal.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed

ISSUES

1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right to have affirmed the decision of the trial Court which was based on extraneous evidence in finding Exhibit “D” was true in total disregard of the Supreme Court’s decisions in plethora of authorities etc OKOH v. STATE (2014) LPELR 22589 (SC), (2014) 8 NWLR (Pt.1410) 502; DEMO OSENI v. STATE (2012) 5 NWLR (Pt.1293) 351?

2. Whether there was any reliable evidence in proof of the identity of the Appellant to support the Court’s decision that the prosecution proved the offence of armed robbery against the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

1. Evidence Act 2011

2. Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act Cap.38 Vol. XXII Laws of the Federation 1990

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT