Ann Amaechi V. The State (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

IGNATIUS IGWE AGUBE, J.C.A. 

This is an Appeal against the Judgment of the Honourable Justice Ngozi Opara then of the Mbano/Etiti Judicial Division Holden at Mbano which Judgment was delivered on Tuesday, the 8th day of November, 2005 finding the Appellant guilty of Manslaughter and sentencing her to 5 (five) years imprisonment with hard labour. However, since the Convict/Appellant had already stayed in Custody for a little more than five (5) years, she was ordered to go home having served the term of imprisonment retrospectively.

It would be recalled that the Appellant was charged along with the 1st Accused Justus Iheazu on a Count of Murder contrary to Section 319 of the Criminal Code CAP 30, Vol.2 Laws of Eastern Nigeria, 1963 as applicable to Imo State of Nigeria in that on the 13th day of April, 2000 at Ikpa Mbara Umuozu Ugiri in Isiala Mbano in the Mbano Umuozu Ugiri in Isiala Mbano in the Mbano/Etiti Judicial Division, she murdered one Margaret Nwosu. On the 21st day of February, 2001 when the charge was read to them each pleaded not guilty.

?At the trial the prosecution called five

1

witnesses and at the close of the Prosecution?s case, the learned Counsel for the Appellant C. T. Okeke Esq, made a No Case Submission which was Over ruled by the Learned Trial Judge. The Appellant and Co-Accused subsequently defended themselves but called no witness and at the close of their case, the Learned State Counsel and Counsel for the Accused persons exchanged their respective Written Addresses that calumniated in the Judgment of the Lower Court Per Ngozi OPARA, J; Now on Appeal discharging the 1st Accused but convicting the Appellant.

Aggrieved by that Judgment, the Appellant herein appealed to this Court by a Notice of Appeal with THREE (3) Grounds dated the 22nd day of May, 2013 and filed on the 4th day of June, 2013 following the extension of time granted her by this Honourable Court on the 30th day of May, 2013. Below are the Grounds of Appeal as Couched and reproduced with their Particulars:
?GROUNDS OF APPEAL
?GROUND ONE -ERROR-IN-LAW:
The learned trial Judge erred in law when he convicted me, the Appellant of manslaughter when the Prosecution did not

2

prove that my act caused injury to the deceased and that the death of the deceased was the direct result of that injury.
PARTICULARS OF ERROR:
1. The Prosecution is bound to prove the offence charged or my guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
2. The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that my act caused injury to the deceased and that the death of the deceased was the direct result of the injury.
3. The Court failed to consider the material contradictions in the evidence of the Prosecution.
4. The PW3 Salomilia Nwosu who claimed to be an eye witness stated in her statement to the Police ?Exhibit 10, that I hit the deceased on the head with a pestle and she fell down and became unconscious.
5. The PW3, Salomilia Nwosu, in her testimony in Court said I hit the deceased on the leg.
6. The PW5, the Medical Doctor stated that the deceased had no problem in the head. That the problem of the deceased was from the abdomen.
7. In view of the above mentioned contradictions, the Honourable Court erred in Law in convicting me of manslaughter.
8. I denied hitting the deceased with any object.
9. The

3

Honourable Court ought to have discharged and acquitted me the Prosecution having failed to prove my guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
?GROUND TWO -ERROR -IN-LAW:
The learned Trial Judge erred in Law when he convicted me of manslaughter when the prosecution?s case is replete with material contradictions.
PARTICULARS OF ERROR:
The prosecution is bound to prove my guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
2. There were material contradictions in the case of the prosecution which were not explained by the Prosecution.
3. The contradictions cast serious doubt in the case of the prosecution.
4. The Court ought to have resolved the contradictions in my favour but it did not.
5. The Court ought to have discharged and acquitted me.
?GROUND THREE ? ERROR-IN-LAW:
The Judgment is unwarranted, unreasonable and cannot be supported, having regard to the evidence.
?RELIEF SOUGHT:
(1) An Order of Court setting aside the Judgment of the Lower Court delivered on 8/11/2005 convicting the Appellant of manslaughter and sentencing her to 5 years imprisonment with hard labour.
(2) An Order

4

of Court discharging and acquitting the Appellant.?

Upon the entry of the Appeal hereto the respective learned Counsel for the parties filed and exchanged their Brief of Argument. For the Appellant, C. T. Okeke, Esq, who settled her Brief dated the 18th day of July, 2013, three Issues were nominated from the three Grounds of Appeal Couched in the following terms:
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
?1. Whether the Prosecution proved that it was the act of the Appellant that caused the injury to the deceased and that the death of the deceased was the direct consequence of that injury?