Deboye Olatunji V. The State (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OBIETONBARA DANIEL-KALIO, J.C.A.

This appeal is over the judgment of the Lower Court in a case of murder. The Appellant Deboye Olatunji was charged with murder contrary to Section 316 and punishable under Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Ogun State, 2006. The particulars of the offence indicate that the Appellant on or about the 30th of September, 2008 at Mokola Area of Abeokuta Ogun State, unlawfully killed one Mrs Olabisi Ladipo. The prosecution at the Lower Court called two witnesses both policemen and tendered confessional statements and a medical report which were admitted in evidence. The Appellant testified in his own defence. After reviewing the evidence and considering the submissions of learned counsel, the learned trial judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution had established the guilt of the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt. He therefore found him guilty of the offence and sentenced him to death as mandatorily required. Judgment was delivered by the Lower Court on 8/5/13.

?Dissatisfied with the judgment, the Appellant within one month of the delivery of the judgment, that

1

is to say, on 5/6/13 filed a Notice of Appeal against the judgment. The Notice of Appeal indicated that additional grounds of appeal, aside the one stated in it, would be filed. The Appellant made good his intention by obtaining leave of Court to file additional grounds of appeal and then filed an Amended Notice of Appeal on 30/9/14. The following five grounds of appeal were disclosed in the Amended Notice of Appeal: –
“GROUND ONE
The Decision of the High Court is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the weight of evidence.
GROUND TWO
The Lower Court erred in law and misdirected itself when it convicted the Appellant for the offence of murder contrary to Section 316 of the Criminal Code Law, Laws of Ogun State, 2006 when there was no eye witness account and the credibility of the purported confessional statement relied upon has been impeached.
GROUND THREE
The learned trial judge erred in law when be held that the Appellant’s extra judicial statements corroborated each other in spite of the inconsistency and which error has occasioned a miscarriage of justice.
GROUND FOUR
The Lower Court erred in law and

2

misdirected itself when it convicted the Appellant on the grounds that read that the Appellant was on a fact finding mission or revenge mission.
GROUND FIVE
The judgment is against the weight of evidence.”

The Appellant gave particulars of the errors allegedly made by the Lower Court with respect to all the grounds of appeal except for ground five.

The Appellant’s Brief of Argument was prepared by Mrs Adedoyin Rhodes-Vivour. The Brief was filed on 14/9/15 but by an order of this Court, it was deemed properly filed and served on 15/2/16. A. A. Oyefesu, Chief State Counsel Ogun State Ministry of Justice prepared the Respondent’s Brief. The Brief was filed on 18/2/16. For the purpose of deciding this appeal, the Appellant proffered three issues for determination. The issues are:-
1. Whether from the circumstances of the case and totality of the evidence before the learned trial judge, reasonable doubt has not been established to exonerate the Appellant from the commission of the offence charged, which is void of its ingredients (This issue was distilled from grounds 1 and 2 of the grounds of appeal).
2. Whether or not the alleged

3

confessional statements corroborate each other and whether the learned trial judge exercised due caution in convicting the Appellant of the offence charged based on the inconsistencies in the statements and retraction (This issue was distilled from grounds 3 and 4 of the grounds of appeal).
3. Whether the Lower Court was right when it raised issues suo motu without calling on the parties to address it (This issue was distilled from ground 5 of the grounds of appeal).

The Respondent’s Brief of Argument identified two issues for determination, viz:-
1. Whether from the totality of evidence adduced at the trial the prosecution has proved the charge against the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt in accordance with Section 135 of the Evidence Act 2011.
2. Whether the judgment of the learned trial judge was against the weight of evidence.

The issues identified by the Appellant are more tailored towards addressing the grievances of the Appellant as articulated in the grounds of appeal. Those issues will therefore serve as the beacons that will lead to the judgment to be arrived at in this appeal.

?Issue I as will be recalled, is whether