ANTHONY OMORUYI V THE STATE

CORAM

IBRAHIM MOHAMMED MUSA SAULAWA, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

IBRAHIM MOHAMMED MUSA SAULAWA, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

IBRAHIM MOHAMMED MUSA SAULAWA, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

IBRAHIM MOHAMMED MUSA SAULAWA, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

IBRAHIM MOHAMMED MUSA SAULAWA, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

HELEN MORONKEJI OGUNWUMIJU, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

IBRAHIM MOHAMMED MUSA SAULAWA, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

AYOBODE OLUJIMI LOKULO-SODIPE, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

AYOBODE OLUJIMI LOKULO-SODIPE, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

PARTIES

ANTHONY OMORUYI APPELLANTS

THE STATE RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The accused was charged at the trial Court for the offence of murder punishable under Section 319 (1) of the Criminal Code, CAP. 48 volume II Laws of the defunct Bendel State, 1976 applicable to Edo State and was convicted accordingly. Dissatisfied with the said conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court, he appealed to this court.

HELD

Appeal Partially Succeeds

ISSUES

Whether or not from the totality of the evidence at the trial, the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the Appellant, as required by law. ?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

GUILT OF AN ACCUSED -WAYS THE GUILT OF AN ACCUSED PERSON IN A CRIMINAL TRIAL CAN BE PROVED

“It is a well settled principle, that in a criminal trial, such as the instant one, the guilt of the accused person can be proved in a number of at least three ways, viz: (i) by the evidence of an eye witness to the commission of the crime; (ii) by circumstantial evidence; and (iii) by the confessional statement of the accused. In essence, a trial court does not necessarily always need the evidence of an eye witness to convict an accused person of murder, if the charge can be proved otherwise by either by circumstantial evidence or confessional statement of the accused person himself.” PER SAULAWA, JCA

MURDER – INGREDIENTS THE PROSECUTION MUST ESTABLISH IN A CHARGE OF MURDER

“It is a trite fundamental principle, that for a charge of murder, as in the instant case, under Section 319 (1) of the Criminal Code CAP. 48 Volume 11, Laws of the defunct Bendel State of Nigeria, 1976 (applicable to Edo State) to be established against the Appellant, the prosecution must prove, beyond reasonable doubt, the following vital ingredients:
(a) That the deceased died.
(b) That the death of the deceased resulted from the act of the Appellant.
(c) That the Appellant caused the death of the deceased intentionally, with the knowledge that death or grievous body harm was its probable consequence.” PER SAULAWA, JCA

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT- WAYS AN ACCUSED PERSON CAN OBJECT TO THE TENDERING OF A CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT

“It is trite, that in any given criminal trial where a confessional statement of an accused person is sought to be tendered by the prosecution, the accused person has the inalienable right to object to the admissibility of the confession in either of two ways. First, the accused person may retract (resile from) or deny ever making such a confession. Second, the accused person may opt to admit having made or signed the statement but claim, however, that he did not make and/or sign it (the confessional statement) voluntarily.” PER SAULAWA, JCA

TAINTED WITNESS-MEANING OF A TAINTED WITNESS

“It is trite, that a tainted witness is one who has a purpose or interest to serve in a given case or litigation.” PER SAULAWA, JCA

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – WHETHER A VOLUNTARY CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT NOT CONFIRMED BEFORE A SUPERIOR POLICE OFFICER RENDERS SUCH CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT INADMISSIBLE

“It is not the law that a true and voluntary confessional statement not read over or confirmed before a superior police officer ceases Ipso facto to be true or voluntary confessional statement or that it is thereby rendered weightless or inadmissible.” PER SAULAWA, JCA

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE IN DETERMINING THE ADMISSIBILITY OR OTHERWISE OF A CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT OF AN ACCUSED

“The appropriate procedure to be adopted by the trial court to determine the admissibility or otherwise of the confessional statement of the accused person entirely depends upon the nature of the objection raised by the defence. Where the accused person denies ever making and or signing the confessional statement (as in the instant case), the confession is still admissible in evidence against the accused person. However, in the circumstance, the trial court must at the conclusion of the trial determine the veracity and probative value of the said confession.” PER SAULAWA, JCA

VOLUNTARY CONFESSION-EFFECT OF A VOLUNTARY CONFESSION

“It is a trite rule of law, that confessions, if made voluntarily, shall be deemed to be relevant facts as against the persons who make them on.” PER SAULAWA, JCA

DEFENCE OF PROVOCATION-HOW IS THE DEFENCE OF PROVOCATION ESTABLISHED

“It is equally a well-established doctrine, that the defence of provocation is predicated upon the admission of the facts as established in the charge and merely raises justification for the commission of the offence. A person who is provoked actually intended the act and was reckless as regards the consequences of the act thereof due to this mental disposition at the time of the commission of the act.” PER SAULAWA, JCA

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

1. Criminal Code CAP. 48 Volume 11,

2. Laws of the defunct Bendel State of Nigeria, 1976 (applicable to Edo State)

3. Evidence Act2.

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT