Mohammed V. State (2022)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

HELEN MORONKEJI OGUNWUMIJU, J.S.C. 

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Sokoto Division hereinafter referred to as the Court below Coram: Hussein Mukhtar, (JCA), Muhammed L. Shuaibu (JCA) and Frederick O. Oho (JCA), delivered on 30th of November, 2017 affirming the judgment of the trial High Court of Sokoto State, sitting in Sokoto presided over by Hon. Justice D. B. Sambo delivered on the 24th day of June, 2014.

Dissatisfied with the said decision of the Court below, the Appellant filed a notice of appeal dated 27th day of December, 2017 containing 3 grounds of appeal urging this Court to set aside the decision of the Court below and to discharge and acquit the Appellant.

The facts found and affirmed by both lower Courts are that:

On the 26/12/2009, the Grand Khadi of Sokoto State, His Lordship Alhaji Abdulkadir Saeed in the company of some friends and/or close associates travelled in a Toyota Sienna minivan or space bus from Sokoto, Sokoto State to Kaura Namoda in Zamfara State for a wedding ceremony. They were robbed on their journey back to Sokoto by the Appellant and others now at large. In the course of the robbery, the robbers shot and killed the Grand Khadi’s Police Orderly, Sergeant Gambo Danga and one Alhaji Abubakar Zaki Tambuwal, a friend of the Grand Khadi.

Following Police intervention and investigation, the Appellant and four other persons were arrested in connection with the robbery. They were charged with three counts before the trial Court for the offence of committing an Illegal act by means of armed robbery under Section 97 of the Penal Code, the offence of armed robbery punishable under Section 298 (C) of the Penal Code, as well as the offence of Culpable Homicide punishable with death under the provisions of Section 221 (b) of the Penal Code.

The Appellant pleaded not guilty to the various counts of the charge on 23rd July, 2013. In proof of its case, the prosecution called nine (9) witnesses. They are Ahmed Abubakar (PW1), Sgt. Uma Tahir (PW2), Sgt. Mohammed Usam (PW3), Cpl. Abdullahi Shuaibu (PW4), ASP Mohammed Sambo (PW5), Cpl. Sheidu Illiyas (PW6), DSP Gali Na Kambo (PW7), Inspt. Bakiru Usman (PW8) and Inspt. Mode Abubakar (PW9).

​In the course of the trial, the Appellant resiled from his extra-judicial statement made to the Police and challenged the admissibility of same. The trial Court however, admitted same in evidence on the basis that it was not its voluntariness that was challenged and the issue raised concerning the statement goes to weight and not admissibility.

Judgment was delivered by the trial Court on 24th of June, 2014 wherein the Court found the Appellant guilty and sentenced him to death by hanging. While the other two (2) surviving Defendants who stood trial with the Appellant were acquitted & discharged, only the Appellant was convicted on all the 3 counts of conspiracy, armed robbery and culpable homicide punishable with death. The defendant who was identified as the leader of the gang died in prison custody awaiting trial.

Dissatisfied by the decision of the trial Court, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal. By an amended Notice of Appeal, the Appellant raised three (3) additional Grounds of Appeal, contending that the learned trial Judge erred in law in admitting certain Exhibits and holding that the case against the Appellant was proved beyond reasonable doubt and thereby convicted and sentenced the Appellant to death.

At the Court of Appeal, the Court decided that the mere fact that the Appellant retracted Exhibits P4 and P4A, did not mean that the learned trial Court could not have acted on the statements especially having successfully tested the truth of the confessions against the guidelines issued by the Court in R v. Skyes and further held that three constituents of the offence of armed robbery were proved to the hilt against the Appellant. The Court below thereafter affirmed the conviction and sentence of the trial Court.

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court below, the Appellant has filed an appeal to this Court on 27/12/2017.

In the brief settled by Dr. Ehiogie WEST-Idahosa for the Appellant, Learned Counsel distilled two issues for determination to wit:

1. Whether from the totality of evidence adduced before the trial Court, the lower Court was right in affirming the judgment of the trial Court that the prosecution proved the offences charged against the Appellant upon credible and legally admissible evidence as to warrant his conviction and death sentence, (Distilled from Ground 1)
2. Whether the lower Court was right in affirming the nature of identification of the Appellant by PW1 when the said identification process did not comply with the essential proper identification laid down in Ikemson v. State (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 110) Pg. 455 @ 475 (SC). (Distilled from Ground 2)

The learned Counsel for the Respondent, Mr. Paul Kasim is of the view that the only sustainable issue for determination is the 2nd issue as couched by the Appellant’s Counsel. Be that as it may, there is no doubt that issue two can be subsumed in issue one and a thorough consideration of same will explore all the complaints by the Appellant against the judgment of the Court below. I have couched the sole issue for determination in the following terms.