ISONG AKPAN UDOEBRE V THE STATE - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

ISONG AKPAN UDOEBRE V THE STATE

PROFESSOR T.M. YESUFU V GOVERNOR EDO STATE AND VISITOR, EDO STATE UNIVERSITY
June 24, 2025
ALHAJI SARATU ADELEKE V SANUSI IYANDA
June 24, 2025
PROFESSOR T.M. YESUFU V GOVERNOR EDO STATE AND VISITOR, EDO STATE UNIVERSITY
June 24, 2025
ALHAJI SARATU ADELEKE V SANUSI IYANDA
June 24, 2025
Show all

ISONG AKPAN UDOEBRE V THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (2001) Legalpedia (SC) 11888

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Jun 1, 2001

Suit Number: SC. 59/2000

CORAM


ADOLPHUS GODWIN KARIBI-WHYTE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

IDRIS LEGBO KUTIG, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OKAY ACHIKE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MAMMAN NASIR

SAMSON ODEMWINGIE UWAIFO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


1. ISONG AKPAN UDOEBRE2. UFIA AKPAN JOE3. MONDAY AKPAN ETOK UDO UDO APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The 1st appellant was charged alongside other accused persons for the murder of one Mathew Ndueso. The accused persons were found guilty and sentenced to death upon circumstantial evidence of one of the witnesses though corroborated by that of another witness. The Accused appealed to the court of appeal, which later discharge the 4th accused and upheld the conviction and sentence of others, hence this appeal to the Supreme Court against their conviction.


HELD


Appeal dismissed for lacking in merit


ISSUES


(1)Whether the failure to mention the name of the 1st Appellant by the PW2 to the Police at the earliest opportunity was fatal to the case of the prosecution in the face of other proven evidence.(2) Whether the identification evidence which acquitted the 4th accused was the same with the evidence against the appellants.(3) Whether the defence of alibi was properly raised by the appellants.(4) Whether the circumstantial evidence against the Appellants was strong and compelling to amount to proof beyond reasonable doubt.(5) Whether Exhibit ‘C’ expunged by the Court of Appeal in any way weakened the case against the 3rd Appellant.?


RATIONES DECIDENDI


SLIP RULE


An excusable slip which does not occasion a miscarriage of justice cannot be said to be sufficient to invalidate the trial. PER A O ACHIKE


CASES CITED


R v. Onufrejezyk (1955) 1 Q.B. 388; C.r App. R 1,R v. Tepper (1952) AC 480 Ekanem v. The King (1950)13 WACA 108Okosi v. The State (1989) 1 SC.L.R.N. 29, 41 Yanor v. The State (1965) 1 All N.L.R 193Gachi v. The State (1965) N.M.L.R. 333. Olubode v. Salami (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt.7) 282.?


STATUTES REFERRED TO


NONE


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT 

Comments are closed.