Deboye Olatunji V. The State (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

OBIETONBARA DANIEL-KALIO, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal is over the judgment of the Lower Court in a case of murder. The Appellant Deboye Olatunji was charged with murder contrary to Section 316 and punishable under Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Ogun State, 2006. The particulars of the offence indicate that the Appellant on or about the 30th of September, 2008 at Mokola Area of Abeokuta Ogun State, unlawfully killed one Mrs Olabisi Ladipo.

The prosecution at the Lower Court called two witnesses both policemen and tendered confessional statements and a medical report which were admitted in evidence. The Appellant testified in his own defence. After reviewing the evidence and considering the submissions of learned counsel, the learned trial judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution had established the guilt of the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt. He therefore found him guilty of the offence and sentenced him to death as mandatorily required. Judgment was delivered by the Lower Court on 8/5/13.

?Dissatisfied with the judgment, the Appellant within one month of the delivery of the judgment, that

1

is to say, on 5/6/13 filed a Notice of Appeal against the judgment. The Notice of Appeal indicated that additional grounds of appeal, aside the one stated in it, would be filed. The Appellant made good his intention by obtaining leave of Court to file additional grounds of appeal and then filed an Amended Notice of Appeal on 30/9/14. The following five grounds of appeal were disclosed in the Amended Notice of Appeal: –

“GROUND ONE

The Decision of the High Court is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the weight of evidence.

GROUND TWO

The Lower Court erred in law and misdirected itself when it convicted the Appellant for the offence of murder contrary to Section 316 of the Criminal Code Law, Laws of Ogun State, 2006 when there was no eye witness account and the credibility of the purported confessional statement relied upon has been impeached.

GROUND THREE

The learned trial judge erred in law when be held that the Appellant’s extra judicial statements corroborated each other in spite of the inconsistency and which error has occasioned a miscarriage of justice.

GROUND FOUR

The Lower Court erred in law and