MOSUNMOLA IYABOLA FADAYOMI VS OLUDOLAPO OMONIYI SADIPE
July 22, 2025CHIEF MRS F. AKINTOLA & ANOR VS MRS C.F.A.D SOLANO
July 22, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1986-02) Legalpedia 90096 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden At Lagos
Fri Apr 25, 1986
Suit Number: SC 233/1984
CORAM
ESO, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
UWAIS, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
COKER,JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
KARIBI-WHYTE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
OPUTA, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
JOHN NWACHUKWU
APPELLANTS
THE STATE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
OFFENCE OF ROBBERY
SUMMARY OF FACTS
Appellant with two others were charged before the High Court with the offence of robbery. At the conclusion of the trial, the trial judge found only the appellant guilty of the offence as charged on the information. The other two were found not guilty and were accordingly acquitted and discharged. Appellant was sentenced to death by hanging or by firing squad as the Governor of Lagos State may decide. Appellant appealed against his conviction to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction for robbery. In its place a conviction for the offence of robbery, with imprisonment for 21 years was substituted. An appeal was brought before the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
HELD
The appeal was dismissed.
ISSUES
1. The learned judges of the Court of Appeal erred in law in changing the charge of robbery & firearms under the Robbery & Firearms Decree 1970 (as amended) to simple robbery and found (sic) the appellant guilty of the ordinary robbery without calling on the parties to address it on the desirability of such holding.
2. The learned judges of the Court of Appeal erred in law in reducing the charge to that of ordinary robbery when the evidence before the court cannot sustain such a finding law (sic).
RATIONES DECIDENDI
ROBBERY SIMPLICITER
“Where robbery simpliciter is committed, unaccompanied by the use of firearms as defined under section 9, this is the lesser of the aggravated offence under section 1(2) (a) of the Decree.” Per KARIBI-WHYTE, J.S.C.
WHEN COURT WILL INTERFERE WITH CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACTS BY THE TWO COURTS BELOW
“It is only in very exceptional cases, and where the injuries of the findings of fact are egregious and the court has no doubt that the decision is wrong will this court interfere with concurrent findings of facts by the two courts below. ” Per KARIBI-WHYTE, J.S.C.
CASES CITED
Ohere v. Ohere (1942) 2 W.A.C.A. 1
Otubu & Ors v. Guobadia (1984) 10 S.C. 130.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available
