Legalpedia Citation: (2024-07) Legalpedia 57985 (SC)

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Holden at Abuja

Fri Jul 12, 2024

Suit Number: SC.CR/620/2019

CORAM


mohammed garba-Justice of supreme court

emmanuel akomaye agim-Justice of supreme court

chioma egondu nwosu-iheme-Justice of supreme court

haruna simon tsammani-Justice of supreme court

jamilu yammama tukur-Justice of supreme court


PARTIES


NEWMAN OSI

APPELLANTS 


THE STATE

RESPONDENTS 


AREA(S) OF LAW


Criminal Law

Armed Robbery

Conspiracy

Identification Evidence

Alibi

Criminal Procedure

Appeal

 


SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant, Newman Osi, was convicted of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and armed robbery. On the 24th of December 2004, Osi and others (who are still at large) entered the home of the victims armed with firearms and robbed them of their possessions. The appellant was arrested the following day based on the identification by one of the victims, PW2, and was subsequently charged and arraigned. He pleaded not guilty, but the trial court convicted him and sentenced him to death by hanging. The Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, leading to this final appeal to the Supreme Court.

 


HELD


The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decisions of both the trial court and the Court of Appeal. It held that the evidence against the appellant, particularly the identification by PW2 and PW3, was credible and sufficient to establish his guilt. The appellant’s defense of alibi was found to be unsubstantiated, and the testimony of DW1 was deemed irrelevant as it was not raised in the grounds of appeal.

 


ISSUES


1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in upholding the trial court’s conviction and sentencing of the appellant for conspiracy to commit armed robbery and armed robbery?

2. Whether the testimony of DW1, a senior police officer and head of the investigation team, was wrongly evaluated?

3. Whether the identification of the appellant by PW2 was reliable?

4. Whether the defence of alibi was properly considered by the trial court?

 


RATIONES DECIDENDI


BURDEN OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL CASES – PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT


“The prosecution in a criminal case must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. In this case, the prosecution presented strong and credible evidence that the appellant participated in the armed robbery, satisfying the required standard of proof.”

– Per Chioma Egondu Nwosu-Iheme JSC

 


IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE – RELIABILITY OF EVIDENCE FROM VICTIMS WHO WERE FAMILIAR WITH THE ACCUSED


“Identification of the accused by PW2 and PW3 was reliable because the witnesses had seen the appellant before the incident and recognized him during the robbery.”

– Per Haruna Simon Tsammani JSC

 


WITNESS TESTIMONY – IMPORTANCE OF CONSISTENT EVIDENCE FROM MULTIPLE WITNESSES


“The testimonies of PW2 and PW3 were consistent and corroborated each other. The fact that they both identified the appellant as one of the robbers gave significant weight to the prosecution’s case.”

– Per Emmanuel Akomaye Agim JSC

 


ALIBI – FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE ALIBI IS NOT FATAL IF THERE IS EVIDENCE FIXING THE ACCUSED AT THE SCENE


“Even if the defense of alibi was not investigated by the police, the overwhelming evidence placing the appellant at the scene of the crime nullified the defense of alibi.”

– Per Mohammed Lawal Garba JSC

 


CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACT – WHEN THE SUPREME COURT WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH CONCURRENT FINDINGS


“The Supreme Court will not disturb concurrent findings of fact by lower courts unless those findings are shown to be perverse. In this case, the findings of the trial court and the Court of Appeal were well-supported by evidence and not perverse.”

– Per Jamilu Yammama Tukur JSC

 


EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION – PROXIMITY TO THE ACCUSED AND LIGHTING CONDITIONS CAN ESTABLISH RELIABILITY


“The evidence of PW2 and PW3 was credible as they had ample opportunity to observe the appellant under good lighting conditions during the robbery, which made their identification reliable.”

– Per Chioma Egondu Nwosu-Iheme JSC

 


CONSPIRACY – PROOF OF CONSPIRACY CAN BE INFERRED FROM THE CONDUCT OF THE ACCUSED AND OTHERS


“Conspiracy is often inferred from the actions of the parties involved. The appellant’s participation in the robbery, alongside others, established the element of conspiracy.”

– Per Haruna Simon Tsammani JSC

 


EVIDENCE FROM POLICE OFFICER – IMPACT OF A WITNESS DYING BEFORE CROSS-EXAMINATION


“Although DW1, a police officer, died before the conclusion of his cross-examination, his testimony did not significantly affect the case since his evidence was properly evaluated at trial.”

– Per Mohammed Lawal Garba JSC

 


MISTAKEN IDENTITY – EVIDENCE OF RECOGNITION IS MORE RELIABLE THAN A MERE IDENTIFICATION PARADE


“Recognition by a witness who is familiar with the accused prior to the crime is more reliable than an identification parade. The appellant was recognized by the witnesses during the robbery.”

– Per Emmanuel Akomaye Agim JSC

 


FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE – FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE ALIBI DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY VITIATE PROSECUTION’S CASE


“Failure by the police to investigate the alibi of the appellant did not undermine the prosecution’s case because of the strong evidence placing the appellant at the scene of the crime.”

Per Chioma Egondu Nwosu-Iheme JSC

 


DEFENSES – DEFENSE OF ALIBI MUST BE RAISED AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY AND PROVEN


“The defense of alibi must be raised at the earliest opportunity and must be proven. In this case, the appellant’s alibi was weak and did not displace the strong evidence of his involvement in the robbery.”

– Per Haruna Simon Tsammani JSC

 


STANDARD OF PROOF – PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT DOES NOT REQUIRE PROOF BEYOND ALL DOUBT


“Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all doubt. The evidence presented by the prosecution carried a high degree of probability, which was sufficient to meet the standard of proof.”

– Per Mohammed Lawal Garba JSC

 


ROBBERY – ESTABLISHING THE ELEMENTS OF ARMED ROBBERY


“The prosecution successfully established all three elements of armed robbery: that there was a robbery, that it was committed with a firearm, and that the appellant was one of the participants.”

– Per Jamilu Yammama Tukur JSC

 


CASES CITED


Not Available

 


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act Cap 398 Vol. 22 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990

Evidence Act, 2011

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999

Supreme Court Act, 2004

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGEMENT

Legalpedia

Recent Posts

MR. OSIBAKORO OTUEDON V MR. UCHENNA LIVINUS OFOR

Legalpedia Citation: (2024-07) Legalpedia 22521 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden at Abuja…

6 hours ago

MACFRANKLYN ENGINEERING & SERVICES V DAEWOO NIGERIA LIMITED

Legalpedia Citation: (2024-09) Legalpedia 64786 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden at Abuja…

1 day ago

FESTUS EDEGWA V THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (2024-07) Legalpedia 25657 (CA) In the Court of Appeal Holden at ibadan Fri…

1 day ago

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF KANO STATE V. SUNUSI MUSA (SAN)

Legalpedia Citation: (2024-07) Legalpedia 79628 (CA) In the Court of Appeal Holden at Abuja Fri…

1 day ago

ARINOLA AKINLEYE V. THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (2024-07) Legalpedia 02404 (CA) In the Court of Appeal Holden at Ibadan Fri…

1 day ago

MR. WAIDI OGUNBAMBI & 5 ORS V. MR. ISIAKA SHOWUNMI SOETAN & 18 ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (2024-07) Legalpedia 16032 (CA) In the Court of Appeal HOLDEN AT IBADAN Fri…

1 day ago