Daniel Ita Effiom v. The State (2024)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

JOHN INYANG OKORO, JSC (Delivering the leading judgment)

This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal, Akure Judicial Division, delivered on the 22nd day of March, 2018, which affirmed the decision of the High Court of Ondo State, Akure Judicial Division, delivered on the 20th day of January, 2016, which imposed the death sentence; twenty-one years’ imprisonment; and fourteen years imprisonment, on the appellant, for the offences of murder, robbery and conspiracy to commit murder, respectively, upon his conviction.

Daniel Ita Effiom, the appellant, was an employee of the victim (now deceased), Prof. Albert Adeoye Ilemobade, who lived at No. 1 Ikere Street, Ijapo Estate, Akure, Ondo State. The appellant served the deceased as his gateman/security guard.

On the 21st day of June, 2015, the deceased was declared missing and suspected to have been kidnapped when he and his Toyota RAV4 SUV could not be found at his residence.

The appellant was also found missing. Reports were made by the deceased’s family to the Police, who swung into action to unravel this mysterious disappearance of the deceased and his car.

At about mid-day on the 26th day of June, 2015, the Police informed the deceased’s family that the appellant and one Olayemi Bamitale, the deceased’s erstwhile driver, were arrested at Ijebu-Ode while trying to sell a Red coloured Toyota RAV 4 SUV registered in the deceased’s name.

Upon interrogation, the two led the Police to the discovery of the deceased’s decomposing corpse in the garage of his house. It was alleged that they had made confessional statements wherein they described how they deceived the deceased out of his house, strangulated him and dragged his corpse into the garage after covering him in diesel oil.

After investigation, the appellant and Olayemi Bamitale were arraigned before the trial court on a three-count charge of conspiracy to commit murder, murder and robbery of the deceased contrary to the provisions of sections 342, 319, and 1 (2) (b) of the Criminal Code, Cap 37 vol. 1, Laws of Ondo State, 2006, and Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, Cap. R11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, (LFN) 2004, respectively.

The arraignment took place on the 25th day of October, 2015, wherein the appellant pleaded “Not Guilty” to the three counts of conspiracy, murder and robbery on the information.

At the trial, the respondent as prosecution fielded four witnesses, PW1-PW4, and tendered documentary evidence contained in eight (8) exhibits (PW1- PWG) to establish its case, after which the appellant, in his defence, simply testified for himself and did not call any other witness.

At the conclusion of trial, the trial court was convinced that the appellant was properly and duly linked with the commission of the three offences. Hence, on the 20th day of January, 2016, the trial court delivered written reasons in finding the appellant guilty of the three offences and sentenced him as follows: fourteen (14) years term of imprisonment for conspiracy; twenty-one (21) years term of imprisonment for robbery; and sentence to death by hanging for murder.

Dissatisfied with his conviction and sentence, the appellant lodged an appeal before the lower court via a notice of appeal filed on the 3rd day of March, 2016, which dismissed his appeal and affirmed the decision of the trial court.

Dissatisfied with the decision of the lower court, the appellant has lodged this instant appeal via a notice of appeal filed on the 3rd day of May, 2018. The said notice of appeal contained four grounds of appeal from which the appellant distilled four issues for determination in his brief of argument filed on the 29th day of June, 2018, to wit:

1. Whether the lower court was not in error when it held that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt?
2. Whether the lower court did not misdirect itself when it held that the failure of the respondent to call the medical practitioner who conducted the autopsy examination on the corpse of the deceased did not vitiate the admission and validity of the said report?
3. Whether the lower court was not in error to have relied heavily on the testimony of the deceased’s son without exercising some level of circumspection?
4. Whether the decision of the lower court is not against the weight of evidence having regard to all the circumstances of the case?

In opposing the instant appeal, the respondent by his brief of argument filed on the 19th day of March, 2019, also submitted four issues for determination, to wit: