CORAM

SALIHU MODDIBBO ALFA BELGORE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

JUSTICE ABIMBOLA O. OGIE

SAMSON ODEMWINGIE UWAIFO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

SAMSON EMEKA APPELLANTS

THE STATE RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant confessed to have drugged the deceased and subsequently plucked out her eyes for money making rituals. He denied the statement at trial on the grounds that it was not voluntary upon which a trial within trial was conducted.

HELD

The appeal against conviction was dismissed.

ISSUES

1. Whether from all the evidence adduced at the trial, there was any material upon which it can be conclusively held, as was done by their Lordships, the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal that it was the act of the Appellant alone that caused the death of the deceased as to make the circumstances of his case to be different, and to be so differently treated from those of the other acquitted persons.2. Whether or not the decision of the court of appeal confirming the Appellant’s conviction and sentence for culpable homicide punishable with death is not unreasonable, unwarranted and manifestly unsupportable in the circumstances of this case when the major plank upon which the same is based was the several extra judicial statements made by him and later on retracted at the trial.”?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

 R. v. Nwobiko Obodo & Ors (1958) 4 F.S.C. 1

STATUTES REFERRED TO

The Evidence Act.

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT