Agboro Egar V. The State (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ONYEKACHI A. OTISI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment and sentence of the Cross River State High Court of Justice, Ikom Judicial Division delivered on 22nd March, 2013 in Charge No HM/26C/2011 in which the Appellant was convicted and sentenced to death by hanging.

The Appellant and the Deceased, one Nelson Aje, had a dispute over land situate at Enyenghe Forest, Balep, in Ikom Local Government Area of Cross River State. The contentions were as to the boundary marks of their lands and as to which portion of the land was owned by each of them.

In the course of these contentions, the Appellant alleged that the deceased chased him and his son with a machete which compelled the Appellant to defend himself by shooting the deceased with a gun.

The Appellant was charged with murder, punishable under Section 319(1) of the Criminal Code Law Cap C.16 Vol. 3 Laws of Cross River State, 2004. At the trial, the prosecution called 2 witnesses, and tendered 2 exhibits. The Appellant testified in his own defence and tendered no exhibit. At the conclusion of trial, the Appellant was convicted and sentenced to death by hanging. The Appellant, aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, filed this appeal.

The Appellant’s Notice and Grounds of Appeal was filed on 26/3/2013 on three grounds of appeal. The Appellant’s Brief of Argument was settled by Emmanuel Okang, Esq. on 19/9/2013. The Respondent’s Brief was settled by F.I. Ititim, Esq., Acting Director, Ministry of Justice, Cross River State, on 29/10/2013.

On 24/3/2014, the Appellant’s Brief was adopted by Miss J.O. Otto, of Counsel, holding the brief of Emmanuel Okang, Esq.; while P.S. Bisong, Esq., Director, Public Prosecution, Ministry of Justice, Cross River State, adopted the Respondent’s Brief.

From the three Grounds of Appeal, the Appellant distilled three Issues for determination as follows:

1. Whether the verdict or judgment of the Trial Court, delivered on the 22nd day of March, 2013 is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regards to the evidence.
2. Whether the Prosecution proved all the essential ingredients of murder against the Convict/Appellant.
3. Whether the defence of provocation and self defence were not established by the Convict/Appellant.

The Respondent adopted the issues raised for determination by the Appellant. I shall consider Issues No 1 and No 2 together, and then Issue No 3.

ISSUE NO. 1 AND ISSUE NO.2.

It is submitted for the Appellant that where there is a complaint of judgment being unreasonable, in law, it means that:-

a. The decision runs counter to evidence.

b. The trial court took into account matters which it ought not to have taken into account or it shut its eyes to the obvious.

c. It ignored the facts or evidence before it; relying on Moses vs. State (2006) 11 NWLR (PT. 992) 471; Adenugha v. Okelola (2003) FWLR (PT. 398) 292.