CORAM

PARTIES

SUNDAY EHIMIYEIN APPELLANTS

THE STATE

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant was tried along with one Folorunsho Alufohai by the High Court of Edo State sitting in Benin City on two count charge of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and armed robbery both punishable under Section 1 (2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, Cap 398, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990.  The Appellant and a gang of armed robbers invaded the residence of one Rev. Raphael Aggi (late) armed with offensive weapons including a gun, cutlass and acid and robbed him of some valuables and in the process poured acid on his daughter’s face. While making their statement at the police station, PW3, the late Rev. Aggi’s wife and her husband identified the Appellant and the 2nd Accused person who were arrested by the Investigating Police Officer as the armed robbers who robbed them and further identified the properties that were stolen by them. The Appellant in his extra judicial statements at the Ekiadolor Police Station and the State Crime Investigation Department voluntarily confessed to the commission of the crime but denied being involved in the armed robbery in his testimony before the court. At the end of the trial, the Accused persons were convicted on both counts and were sentenced to death by hanging for the offences. Aggrieved with the decision of the trial Court, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal which affirmed the conviction and sentence of the Appellant. Further dissatisfied, the Appellant has appealed to the Supreme Court.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed.

ISSUES

1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in affirming the conviction and sentence of the Appellant on the basis of the doctrine of recent possession (Ground 2 of the Grounds of Appeal); ?

2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in affirming the conviction and sentence of the Appellant on the basis of the confessional statement of the Appellant (Ground 3 of the Grounds of Appeal);? and

3. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in affirming the decision of the trial Court in holding that the Prosecution proved the guilt of the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt (Ground 1)?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

1. Evidence Act, 2011 (as amended)

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

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT