n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Simon V. State (2017) CLR 1(h) (SC)

Judgement delivered on January 27th 2017

Brief

  • Armed Robbery - What prosecution must prove to succeed
  • Concurrent finding of fact – Appellate court attitude to
  • Armed Robbery – Whether weapon used must be produced
  • Withholding Evidence – Nature of
  • Confessional Statement – Meaning of
  • Conspiracy
  • Accused person – Evidence at variance with earlier statements
  • Inconsistency rule – Applicability of
  • Cross Examination – Importance of
  • Section 5 of the Robbery and Firearms Special Provisions Act 1990
  • Section 1(2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearms Special Provisions Act 1990
  • Section 167(d) of the Evidence Act
  • Section 28 of the Evidence Act

Facts

The appellant, and two others namely Joel Adamu and Ibrahim Musa were arraigned before Talba J, of an Abuja High Court charged with conspiracy to commit armed Robbery and Armed Robbery contrary to Section 5 and 1(2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearms Special Provisions Act Cap 398 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990.

The appellant and the other two accused persons denied both counts. This is an appeal by the 1st accused person. At the trial, the prosecution fielded three witnesses and tendered two statements while the appellant testified in his defence. He did not call any witness. After hearing and evaluation of evidence the learned trial judge convicted the appellant and the other two accused persons on both counts and sentenced them to death.

Dissatisfied with both his conviction and sentence, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal. That Court affirmed the decision of the High Court and dismissed the appeal. This appeal is against that judgment.

THE FACTS ARE THESE

At about 3.40a.m. on 8th September 2005, about ten men armed with clubs, sticks and cutlasses etc broke into the Anglican Church Guest House at Wuse Zone 5, Abuja. They proceeded to steal handsets, money, wrist watches and trinkets from those residing in the guest house. The security man, PW3 was tied down by the appellant and it was he who was left to guard PW3 while the armed robbery was in progress. The Federal Capital Territory Police command control room was alerted. Inspector Akeem Lamboye, PW1 and the other policeman were able to block all exits out of the canal behind the guest house and in the course of combing the bush by the canal, the 1st accused/appellant was arrested and the following items were recovered from him- Samsung handset, N4,930 cash, necklace chain, two wrist watches and a belt. He was taken to the police station where most of the victims of the robbery were already waiting. At the station he made a statement.

During trial his counsel raised objection when the prosecuting counsel applied to tender it. His objection being that the statement was not obtained voluntary. The Court ordered a trial within trial but midway through proceedings of the mini trial on 28th January 2008, learned counsel for the appellant applied to withdraw his objection to the admissibility of the statement on the grounds that the statement was obtained under violence. His position being that the appellant never made a statement. The statement was then admitted in evidence as Exhibit A. The appellant led the police to Jabi Park, Abuja where the two other accused persons were arrested. The second statement made by the appellant was admitted without objection as Exhibit B1.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether the failure of the respondent to call as witnesses the victims of the...

Read More