CORAM

---

SHEHU USMAN MOHAMMED, JSC. (He died in a motor accident on Tuesday, 9th February. 1993, before the J

---

PARTIES

---

SUNDAY NDIDI. APPELLANTS

---

THE STATE

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant was accused by the Native doctor in his village of armed robbery. He was beaten and charged with conspiracy armed robbery under section 1(2)(a) and 4(b) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Decree 1984 but convicted of conspiracy and one count of armed robbery and sentenced to death by hanging.

---

HELD

---

The Supreme Court held by majority (Tobi, JSC Dissenting) that the Court of Appeal was wrong in affirming the decision of the trial Court as the evidence of identification proffered could not support the charge against the appellant

---

ISSUES

---

Whether the Court of Appeal was right in affirming the conviction and sentence of the appellant on the basis of the evidence of PW1 only in the circumstances of this matter

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACTS OF LOWER COURTS WILL NOT BE SET ASIDE EXCEPT WHERE IT IS PERVERSE

---

“This court (the Supreme Court) can only interfere with the concurrent findings if the findings can be shown to be perverse or illegal or that they are a product of improper use of the opportunity of the trial court having heard and watched the witnesses testify.” – Per Aderemi, JSC

---

IDENTIFACTION OF AN ACCUSED IS SINE QUA NON TO CONVICTION

---

“whenever the case of an accused person depends on the correctness of the identification of the accused which the defence alleges to be mistaken, a trial Judge must warn himself of the need to weigh such evidence with others adduced by the prosecution before conviction” Per Aderemi, JSC

---

CASES CITED

---

1. Sobakin v. The State (1981) 5 S.C. 75
2. R. v. Turnbull & Ors. (1976) 3 A.E.R. 549
3. Ogulana & Ors v. the State (1995) 5 SCNJ 189

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

NONE

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT