Adeoye Aliu V. The State (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

HARUNA SIMON TSAMMANI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The Appellant herein, along with Kamorudeen Adebayo and Saheed Balogun were arraigned before the Oyo State High Court, Ibadan Division on a four count charge of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and the commission of armed robbery which are offences punishable under Sections 6(b) and 1(b) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, Cap.R.11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. They were consequently convicted on all the four counts charged and sentenced to death by hanging.

The brief facts of the case as presented by the prosecution is that, on the 14th day of May, 2008, at about 11.00p.m, the P.W.1 who was on duty along with others as Vigilante Group members saw three boys in their area coming out from the bush. That due to constant complaints of armed robbery in the area, the boys were accosted and asked to stop, but two of them run away but one of them was arrested.

That he was searched and a charm was found on him, and upon further interrogation, he introduced himself as Kamoru. Upon further questioning he named the other boys who run away as Aliyu and Saidi. He was then taken to the Ogbere Police Station at about 1.30a.m where he made a statement.

According to the prosecution, the police officer at the Police Station, accompanied by the “land lord” picked up Aliu (Appellant herein) in his house. That on their way home, the other accused person (Saheed) was seen coming out from the bush and he was also arrested. That upon being interrogated, it was confirmed that they are the persons terrorizing the area by robbing people of their valuables. Furthermore, that the Appellant and his co-accused confessed to being responsible for the series of robberies in the area.

At the trial the statements of the accused persons, including that of the Appellant, together with some other Exhibits such as handset phones and charms were tendered in evidence. The prosecution called a total of seven (7) witnesses, while each of the three accused persons testified in his defence, but called no other witness. Upon evaluation of the evidence adduced before him, the learned trial Judge found the accused persons, including the Appellant guilty and sentenced them to death by hanging.

The Appellant is distressed and aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, and therefore filed this appeal. The Original Notice of Appeal which is at pages 72-77 of the Record of Appeal was dated the 14/2/2011 and filed the 16/2/2011. However, by Motion on Notice dated the 12/3/2013 and filed 18/3/2013, the Appellant was on the 09/4/2013 granted leave to amend the Notice of Appeal. Consequently, this appeal was heard on the Amended Notice of Appeal dated 12/3/2013 and filed the 18/3/2013, but deemed filed on the 09/4/2013. The said Amended Notice of Appeal consists of ten (10) Grounds of Appeal, which short of their particulars are reproduced below for ease of reference, if need be. They are:

“1. The Learned Trial Judge erred in law when he convicted the Appellant for conspiracy to commit a felony and armed robbery on his alleged confessional statement which the Appellant denied without any direct corroborative evidence or other facts to support same as laid down in several judicial authorities.

2. The Trial Judge erred in Law in admitting and relying on the purported confessional statement (Exhibit M) of the Appellant and holding that it was “voluntary, positive, unequivocal and amounted to an admission of guilt.
3. The Trial Judge erred in Law in relying on the evidence of PW3, 4 and 5 as corroborating the purported confessional statement of the Appellant.
4. The Trial Court erred in Law in convicting the Appellant on the strength of his retracted confessional statement without corroborative reliable evidence before the court.
5. The Trial Judge erred in Law in convicting the Appellant for robbery when he relied on the identification of Samsung Mobile Phone purportedly owned by PW4.
6. The Trial Judge erred in Law in convicting the Appellant for conspiracy to rob and robbery when he was not caught at the scene of the robbery or armed when he was apprehended.
7. The Learned Trial Judge erred in Law in relying on the evidence of PW5 in convicting the Appellant.
8. The Trial Judge erred in Law in convicting the Appellant for the offence of conspiracy.
9. The Trial Judge erred in Law in convicting the Appellant upon the unreliable confessional statement interpreted from Yoruba to English language.
10. The Trial Judge erred in Law in convicting the Appellant upon the amended charge without taking afresh plea after the amendment.”

The parties to this appeal filed and exchanged briefs of arguments in compliance with the Rules of this court. At the hearing of the Appeal on the 15/4/2014, both parties adopted and relied on their respective briefs of arguments, as their arguments in this appeal.

The Appellant’s Brief of Arguments settled by Abiodun Olaleru, Esq., was dated the 28/01/2014 and filed the 14/2/2014; but deemed filed on the 20/3/2014. Therein, the Appellant formulated four (4) issues for determination as follows:-

“(a) Whether the Appellant’s purported confessional statements were voluntarily made and also admissible in law. [Grounds 1, 2, 3 and 4].

(b) Whether the learned trial Judge was right when he held that the prosecution proved counts 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Charge No: I/29C/2009 beyond reasonable doubt in reaching his conclusion that the Appellant was guilty and thereby sentenced him to death by hanging. [Grounds 5, 6, 7 and 8].

(c) Whether the learned trial Judge was right when he admitted the Appellant’s confessional statements made in Yoruba language but recorded in English language without the interpreter having been called as a witness. [Ground 9].

(d) Whether the learned trial Judge was right in proceeding with the trial of the Appellant without taking a fresh plea from him after the amendment of the charge sheet by the Respondent. [Ground 10].