Babajide Popoola & Anor V. People Of Lagos State (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

UGOCHUKWU ANTHONY OGAKWU, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

In a judgment on 25th March 2013, the High Court of Lagos State, Coram Judice: L. O. Okunnu, J. convicted the Appellant on the two count charge of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and armed robbery preferred against them in Charge No. ID/107C/2011: PEOPLE OF LAGOS STATE v. BABAJIDE POPOOLA & ANOR.

The Appellants were sentenced to twenty-one (21) years imprisonment to run concurrently. The Appellants were dissatisfied with the decision of the Lower Court and they filed a joint notice of appeal on 8th April, 2013. With leave of Court, the Appellants filed an amended notice of Appeal on 16th September 2015, which was deemed as properly filed on 18th October 2016. The amended notice of Appeal is also a joint notice of appeal.

The records of Appeal having been compiled and transmitted, the parties filed and exchanged briefs of argument. The Appellants Brief was filed on 16th September 2015 but deemed as properly filed and served on 25th January 2016. The Respondents Brief was filed on 30th March, 2016 but deemed as properly filed and served on 5th May,2016. The Appellants filed a Reply Brief on 24th May 2016 but

1

deemed as properly filed and served on 18th October 2016. The Appellants distilled four issues for determination in the appeal as follows:

1. Whether the mode of identification of the Appellants fulfilled the requirements of the law? (Distilled from Ground 1 of the Notice of Appeal)
2. Whether the Learned trial Judge was right in convicting the Appellants on mere suspicion? (Distilled from Ground 4 of the Notice of Appeal)
3. Whether the learned trial Judge was right in dismissing the Appellants defence of alibi? (Distilled from Ground 4 of the Notice of Appeal)
4. Whether there was sufficient or any corroborative evidence linking the Appellants to the crime. (Distilled from Grounds 2 and 5 of the Notice of Appeal)

The Respondent on its part also distilled four issues for determination, namely:

(a) Whether this Appeal as constituted by the 1st and 2nd Appellants amended joint Notice of Appeal dated 21st August 2015 is competent in law.

(b) Whether the learned Trial Judge was right to have placed corroborative value on the prosecutions Identification Evidence (Distilled from Ground 1)

2

(c) Whether in the face of the overwhelming evidence presented by the Prosecution, the learned trial Judge ought to have ascribed probative value to the Defence of Alibi (Distilled from Ground 4)

(d) Whether upon reviewing the totality of the facts presented and the evidence adduced before the Trial Court, the Respondent proved its case against the 1st and 2nd Appellants beyond reasonable doubt upon which the trial Judge rightly convicted and sentenced the 1st and 2nd Appellants (Distilled from Grounds 2, 3 and 5).

At the hearing of the appeal, Olabode Shodunke, Esq., (Ganiyu Tiamiyu, Esq. with him) appeared for the Appellants while F.A. Dalley, Esq., (with Mrs. O. Olude) appeared for the Respondent. The learned counsel on both sides of the divide adopted and relied on their briefs of argument in urging the Court to uphold their respective submissions in the determination of the appeal.

Issue number one formulated by the Respondent raises the threshold issue of the competence of the appeal. Ideally, the proper approach would have been for the Respondent to file a notice of Preliminary Objection on the basis of the said issue, however in