ADAMU SALIU V THE STATE

CORAM

EBIOWEI TOBI

PARTIES

ADAMU SALIU APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant and other accused were charged to the High court of Kogi State on three count charge of conspiracy, armed robbery and culpable homicide punishable with death. The robbery took place along Akogun- Ozugbe Road, KotonKarfe area, of Kogi State, where one Mr. Mohammed Abubakar was shot dead and dispossessed of his Red Nissan Saloon Car. At the trial they were found guilty, convicted and sentenced to death. Dissatisfied with the conviction, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal which dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and sentence of the trial Court. The Appellant still dissatisfied has appealed to the Supreme Court.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed

ISSUES

Whether taking into consideration the peculiar facts of’ this case, the learned trial judge and the lower court treated EXHIBIT “E” (alleged confessional statement) properly as the true confessional statement of the Appellant to ground a conviction of armed robbery, conspiracy and culpable homicide. Whether from the totality of evidence before this Honourable court the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt in respect of the three heads of charge against the Appellant considering the role of corroborative evidence in their proof. Whether in the face of the evidence adduced the learned trial Judge and indeed the lower court drew the right inferences and were thereby right in law to have convicted the Appellant on the three heads of charge. Whether the conviction and sentence of the Appellant by the trial court and upheld by the lower court is right despite the absence of a separate sentence in respect of each and every count as charged before the trial court.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT- AN ACCUSSED CAN BE CONVICTED ON HIS CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT ALONE

“It is settled law that an accused person can be validly convicted on his confessional statement alone.”

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT- DUTY OF THE COURT ON THE RETRACTED CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT OF AN ACCUSED PERSON

“It trite law that an accused person can be validly convicted on his confessional statement alone, the courts however state that the trial court, in the circumstance of a retraction by the accused, should direct itself on the requirement of looking for other evidence outside the confessional statement, in this case,”

CONCURRENT FINDINS OF FACT OF THE LOWER COURT- THE SUPREME COURT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH THE CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACT OF THE LOWER COURTS EXCEPT IN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES

“It is settled law that the Supreme Court does not make a practice of inferring with the concurrent findings of fact of the lower courts except in exceptional circumstance, such as where the finding has been demonstrated to be perverse or not supported be evidence on record, etc, etc, which have not been demonstrated to have occurred in the instant case.”

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – WHEN CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT CAN SUSTAIN A CONVICTION

“It is trite law that confessional statement; so long as it is free and voluntary and is direct, positive and properly proved, is enough to sustain conviction. It is because confession is the best evidence in criminal law.”

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT-A CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT IS AN ADMISSION AGAINST THE MAKER – WHETHER FURTHER PROOF IS NEEDED

“A confessional statement is the best evidence that the accused person committed the crime for which he is charged. It is an admission against the maker. No further proof of the offence is usually needed when a confessional statement has been admitted as an exhibit.”

CASES CITED

Adio v. The State (1986) 2 NWLR (PL 24) 581;|Ejelikwu VS State (1993) & NWLR (Pt. 307) 554 at 569.|Jimoh Salawu v. The State (2011) 7SCNJ67.|Onyejekwe VS The State (1992) 3 NWLR (Pt. 230) 444;

STATUTES REFERRED TO

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT