CORAM
HON. JUSTICE OYEBISI F. OMOLEYE (JP)
PARTIES
MOHAMMED SANI APPELLANTS
THE STATE RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Attorney General of Taraba State commenced Criminal Proceedings against the Appellant for the alleged offences of Armed Robbery contrary to Section 1 (2) (a) and (b) of the Robbery and firearms (special provision) Act, 1990 and unlawful possession of firearms punishable under Section (3) (1) of the Act. It was the Respondent’s case that the Appellant while armed with a one barrel pistol robbed one Danladi Jatau of his Toyota Corolla car with registration number TRS – 618 – ARD, black in colour valued at N2,200.00.00 (Two Million, Two Hundred Naira) and the sum of N184,000.00 (One Hundred and Eighty Four Thousand Naira).At the close of the trial, the court convicted the Appellant for the offence of Aiding and Abetting the commission of Armed Robbery on the basis of Exhibit ‘A’, the extra judicial statement of the Appellant. Relying on exhibit ‘A’ the trial court found the Appellant guilty of the offence of aiding and abetting Armed Robbery and was convicted and sentenced to fifteen (15) years imprisonment. The Appellant was unhappy with the conviction and sentence, thus this appeal wherein he contended that the elements of the lesser offence for which the he was convicted by the trial court are not the same as the elements for the original offences.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
Was the trial court right to have convicted and sentenced the Appellant for the offence of Aiding and Abetting the commission of the offence of Armed Robbery with which he was not charged and pleaded to?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CRIMINAL TRIAL – WHETHER AN ACCUSED PERSON MAY BE CONVICTED FOR AN OFFENCE WHICH HE WAS NOT CHARGED AND PLEADED TO
“In line with the submissions of the Learned Counsel to the Respondent, it is true that generally an accused person could only be convicted for an offence to which he has been charged and pleaded to. But, there are expectations, where statute have made specific provisions where an accused person may be convicted for an offence which he was not charged and pleaded to.” –
CONVICTION FOR A LESSER OFFENCE – INSTANCE WHERE A COURT CAN CONVICT AN ACCUSED PERSON OF A LESSER OFFENCE
Sections 217 and 218 of the Criminal Procedure Code, Laws of Taraba State provides as follows:
217 – “if in the case mentioned in Section 216 the accused is charged with one offence and it appears in evidence that he committed a different offence with which he might have charged under the provisions of that Section, he may be convicted of the offence which he is shown to have committed although not charge with it”.
218 (1) “When a person is charged with an offence consisting of several particulars, a combination of same only of which constitutes a complete lesser offence, and such combination is proved but the remaining particulars are not proved, he may be convicted of the lesser offence though he was not charged with it”.
(2) “When a person is charged with an offence and facts are proved which reduce it to a lesser offence, he may be convicted of the lesser offence although he is not charged with it”.
The above provisions enable the court to convict for a lesser offence if the facts are in its support where the lesser offence is shown to have been proved rather than the offence to which the appellant was charged. The important element is that the facts of the lesser offence must be subsumed in the main offence charged which has not proved.” –
CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT- EFFECT OF AN ADMISSION OF CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT WITHOUT OBJECTION
“See: Eguabor Vs. Queen (1962) LPELR – 25096 (SC), Ekpo Vs. State (2018) LPELR – 43843 (SC) and Okon Dan Osung Vs. The State (2012) LPELR – 9720 (SC) PP. 30 – 31, Paragraphs E – D, (2012) 18 NWLR (PT. 1322) P. 256. in Akpan Vs. State (2001) LPELR – 383 (SC) at P. 21, Paragraphs B – C (also reported in 2001 (15) NWLR (PT. 737) P. 745) his Lordship, Karibi – Whyte, JSC gave the effect of a confessional statement admitted without objection simply thus:
“The present statement of the law is that once a confessional statement is admitted in evidence it becomes part of the case for the prosecution which the Judge is bound to consider for its probative value. See Egboghononae V. The State (1993) 7 NWLR (PT. 306) 383; Edetoffion Ekpe V. The State (1994) 9 NLR (PT. 368) 273; Nwangbomu V. The State (1994) 2 NWLR (PT. 327) 380” –
CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT-EFFECT OF A CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT ADMITTED IN EVIDENCE WITHOUT OBJECTION
“Exhibit ‘A’ is the Appellant’s Confessional Statement which was admitted in evidence without objection from the appellant or his counsel. The effect is that the statement was voluntarily made and a court can rightly convict on the basis of the admission contained therein. See: Musa V State (2018) LPELR – 43846 (SC) (P. 13) Paragraphs B-C; Ajibade V. State (2012) LPELR – 15531 (SC) PP 23-24, Paragraphs G-A. Further, the law is that where a Confessional Statement has been tendered and admitted in evidence without objection, its later retraction cannot initiate the proceeding. See: Nwachukwu V. State (2004)17 NWLR (PT. 902) P. 262.” –
CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – WHETHER ACCUSED PERSON CAN BE CONVICTED SOLELY ON HIS CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT
“It is trite that an accused person could be convicted on his Confessional Statement alone. In Ibrahim Kamila V. The State (2018) LPELR – 43603 (SC) P. 14, Paragraph A-E. His Lordship Sanusi, JSC clearly stated the position of the law thus:
“A Confessional Statement simply be defined as an admission by a person charged (or an accused person accused) of committing a crime ay anywhere or anytime stating or suggesting the inference that he committed such crime. See Section 28 of the Evidence Act 2011 as amended. It is well settled law that free and voluntary confession of guilt alone by an accused person, provided it is direct and positive and was dully made voluntarily, is sufficient to ground a conviction, since a confession always remains the best proof of what he had done. See: Alabi V. State (1993) 7 NWLR (PT. 307) 5; Fabiyi V. State (2015) 6 – 7 SC (PT. 1) 83. Osetola And Anor. Vs. State (2012) 6 SCNJ 321; Nwachukwuvs. The State (2002) SCNJ 230; Dogo V. The State (2013)2-3 SC (PT. III) 75 at 92 – 94.” See, also Hassan V. State (2001) LPELR-1358(SC) P.16, PARAGRAPHS C – F. –
CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT- WHETHER THE CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT OF AN ACCUSED PERSON IS SUFFICIENT FOR CONVICTION
“There cannot be stronger and better evidence than the Confessional Statement of an accused person directly and positively confesses to have committed the offence, which is enough for a conviction.” –
CRIMINAL TRIAL- WHETHER A COURT CAN CONVICT AN ACCUSED PERSON OF A DIFFERENT OFFENCE ESTABLISHED FROM THE FACTS WITHOUT A CHARGE BEING FRAMED IN RESPECT OF THE DIFFERENT OFFENCE
“The law is clear that where there is enough evidence before a trial court establishing a different offence from that which the accused person stood trial. The trial court can convict the accused person of the different offence established from the facts without a charge being framed in respect of the different offence, provided that the accused has notice of the offence and was not misled in his defence.” –
CONVICTION OF ACCUSED PERSON FOR A LESSER OFFENCE – WHETHER AN ACCUSED PERSON CAN BE CONVICTED FOR A LESSER OFFENCE EVEN THOUGH HE IS NOT CHARGED FOR THAT OFFENCE
“The law is that an accused person can be convicted for a lesser offence even though not charged for that offence, contrary to the argument of the learned counsel to the Appellant that he cannot be convicted.” The Appellant was rightly convicted for a lesser offence by virtue of the provisions of Section 218 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In substance, the lesser offence is carved out of the particulars of the graver offence charged. See: Okwuma V. State (1964) LPELR-25195(SC) P.5, Paragraph A-D; Adebayo Adeyemi V. State (1991) LPELR -172 (SC) PP.53-54, Paragraph E-D; (1991) 6 NWLR (PT. 195) P. 1; (1991) 7 SC (PT. II) P.1; Mati Musa V. The State (2014) LPELR-24026 (CA) PP. 55-56. G-C; Ahmed Saliu V. The State (2018) LPELR -44064 (SC) PP18-30, Paragraph D-B; Mbachu V. State (2018) LPELR – 45163(SC) PP. 16-19, Paragraph A-D AND John Nwachukwu V. The State (1986) LPELR-2085 (SC) PP 14-15 Paragraph G-C).” –
CASES CITED
None
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Criminal Procedure Code, Laws of Taraba State|
CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT