CORAM
U. MOHAMMAD – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
WALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN JSC JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
FATATI-WILLIAMS, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PHILIP NNAEMEKA AGU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
SABURI ADEBAYO APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant was caught in the process of armed robbery; he confessed and was charged and convicted accordingly. His complain on appeal was that there was consideration of two counts together.
HELD
The court dismissed the appeal.
ISSUES
Whether the lower court failed to consider the legal effect of joint consideration of counts 1 and 2 together; and if so whether the failure occasioned injustice to the Appellant.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE MUST BE SUSTAINTIAL TO SUSTAIN AN APPEAL
In deciding upon whether there had been miscarriage of justice, the court of appeal dealing with the issue raised must be satisfied that it is substantial, not one of mere technicality, which had caused no embarrassment or prejudice to the appellant- Muhammad J.S.C
CASES CITED
1. Okegbu v. State (1979) 12 NSCC 151 at 156
2. Adigun v. A. G. Oyo State (1988) 1 NWLR (Pt.53) 628.
3. Okonkwo v. Udo (1997) 9 NWLR (Pt. 519) 16 at page 20;
4. State v. Ajie (2000) 11 NWLR (Pt. 678) 434 at
STATUTES REFERRED TO
NONE