MR. OSIBAKORO OTUEDON V MR. UCHENNA LIVINUS OFOR
March 1, 2025AICE INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED & ANOR V FIDELITY BANK PLC
March 3, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2024-07) Legalpedia 19487 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden at Abuja
Fri Jul 12, 2024
Suit Number: SC.CR/659/2020
CORAM
emmanuel akomaye agim-Justice of the supreme court
chioma egondu nwosu-iheme-Justice of the supreme court
haruna simon tsamman-Justice of the supreme court
jamilu yammama tukur-Justice of the supreme court
PARTIES
SAMUEL ANI
APPELLANTS
THE STATE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CRIMINAL LAW
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
EVIDENCE
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
APPEAL
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant, Samuel Ani, was tried and convicted for the murder of his maternal uncle, Paul Odo, in the Enugu State High Court. The prosecution’s case was that Ani killed Odo following a dispute over allegations that Ani had stolen money from Odo to build a house. According to the appellant, he and the deceased had an argument, during which the deceased threatened him with a gun. A struggle ensued, leading to the accidental discharge of the weapon, resulting in the death of the deceased. The appellant was convicted by the trial court and sentenced to death, a decision upheld by the Court of Appeal, leading to the current appeal.
HELD
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the appellant’s conviction. It held that the failure to deliver the judgment within 90 days did not occasion a miscarriage of justice, as the trial judge’s evaluation of the evidence remained sound and credible.
ISSUES
1. Whether the court properly evaluated the evidence before them, leading to a perverse decision ?
2. Whether the delivery of the trial court’s judgment outside the statutory 90 days caused a miscarriage of justice ?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
BURDEN OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL CASES – STANDARD REQUIRED
“It is trite law that the burden of proof in criminal cases rests on the prosecution, and it must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. In this case, the prosecution discharged this burden by providing consistent and credible evidence placing the appellant at the scene of the crime.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE – WHEN A JUDGMENT IS NOT PERVERSE
“A judgment is perverse when it is based on findings that are not supported by evidence. In this case, both the trial court and the Court of Appeal properly evaluated the evidence before them and arrived at a conclusion that was well-supported by the facts.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE – THE IMPACT OF CONSISTENT WITNESS TESTIMONY
“While the Constitution requires judgments to be delivered within 90 days, failure to do so will not automatically render the judgment invalid unless the appellant can show that such delay occasioned a miscarriage of justice. The appellant has failed to demonstrate any miscarriage of justice arising from the delayed judgment.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE – THE IMPACT OF CONSISTENT WITNESS TESTIMONY
“When the testimonies of multiple witnesses are consistent and corroborate each other, they provide strong probative value. In this case, the testimonies of PW2 and PW3 were consistent and provided compelling evidence against the appellant.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
DEFENSE OF ALIBI – REQUIREMENTS FOR PROVING AN ALIBI
“The defense of alibi must be raised at the earliest opportunity and supported by credible evidence. In this case, the appellant’s alibi was weak, unsubstantiated, and did not raise reasonable doubt about his involvement in the crime.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
INTENT IN MURDER – NECESSITY OF PROVING MALICE AFORETHOUGHT
“In murder cases, the prosecution must prove that the accused had the intent to cause death or grievous harm. The evidence provided in this case showed that the appellant intentionally participated in the act that led to the death of the deceased.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE – WHEN IT IS SUFFICIENT FOR CONVICTION
“Circumstantial evidence can be as strong as direct evidence when it forms a compelling chain that points conclusively to the guilt of the accused. In this case, the circumstantial evidence was overwhelming and led to the appellant’s conviction.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS – WHEN THEY CAN BE RELIED UPON
“A voluntary confessional statement is admissible and can be the sole basis for a conviction if it is credible and consistent with other evidence in the case. The appellant’s confession was supported by other evidence, including witness testimony.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE ALIBI – ITS EFFECT ON THE PROSECUTION’S CASE
“Failure by the police to investigate an alibi does not automatically vitiate the prosecution’s case if there is strong and credible evidence linking the accused to the crime. The evidence in this case conclusively placed the appellant at the scene.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
JUDICIAL DISCRETION – WHEN AN APPELLATE COURT WILL NOT INTERFERE
“Appellate courts are reluctant to interfere with the exercise of judicial discretion unless it is shown that such discretion was wrongly exercised or led to a miscarriage of justice. In this case, there was no basis for interfering with the trial court’s discretion.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
INTENTION TO KILL – WHEN IT CAN BE INFERRED FROM ACTIONS
“Intention to kill can be inferred from the circumstances of the crime. The use of a deadly weapon, such as a gun, and the location of the injury (the deceased was shot in the face) are strong indicators of intent to kill.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES – ROLE OF CONSISTENCY IN DETERMINING CREDIBILITY
“The consistency of the testimonies of multiple witnesses is a critical factor in determining their credibility. In this case, the consistency between the testimonies of PW2 and PW3 strengthened the prosecution’s case.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
SELF-DEFENSE – WHEN IT IS NOT APPLICABLE
“The defense of self-defense is not available where the accused had other means of avoiding danger or could have retreated. The evidence in this case showed that the appellant could have avoided the confrontation, making the defense of self-defense inapplicable.”
Per Haruna Simon Tsammani, JSC
CASES CITED
Not Available
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available
