ILIYASU SUBERU V THE STATE

CORAM

---

---

PARTIES

---

ILIYASU SUBERU APPELLANTS

---

RESPONDENTS

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant was charged with criminal conspiracy and robbery. He made a no-case submission which the trial court overruled. He appealed to the court of appeal but it was dismissed. He further appealed

---

HELD

---

Appeal was allowed the judgment of the lower court was set aside

---

ISSUES

---

Whether the learned justice of the Court of appeal were right to hold that a prima facie case had been established against the appellant

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

EFFECT OF EXTRA JUDICIAL STATEMENT OF CO-ACCUSED.

---

“An extra judicial statement by a co-accused remains a statement and not his evidence. It is binding on the maker only.” Per FABIYI J.S.C

---

RELEVANCY NOT SOLE TEST FOR ADMISSIBILITY.

---

“Relevancy is not the only yardstick or test for admissibility. A document may be relevant and still be excluded if there is in existence a law, like the provision of section 27(3) of the Evidence Act, which renders Exhibit 1 inadmissible as against the appellant..” Per FABIYI J.S.C

---

INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE IS USELESS.

---

“If evidence is inadmissible, the court cannot make use of it at any stage. This is even so where no objection has been raised against it at the trial.” Per FABIYI J.S.C

---

CASES CITED

---

1. Gabriel Aituma v. The State (2006) 10 NWLR (Pt.989) (supra) at page 473.2. Ibeziako v. Police (1963) SCNLR 99 3. Gabriel Aituma v. The State (2006) 10 NWLR (Pt.989) 4524. Alade v. Oludade(1976) 10 NSCC 34.

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

NONE

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT