Ikechukwu Okoh V. The State (2008)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

AYOBODE O. LOKULO-SODIPE, J.C.A.

This appeal is against the judgment delivered on 19/7/2005 by the High Court of Justice, Niger State, Minna Judicial Division (coram Hon. Justice Amina A. Wambai). By the Further Amended Charge at pages 99-100 of the Record, the Appellant and four others were charged with the offences of conspiracy to commit the offence of armed robbery; and armed robbery; respectively, under the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Decree No. 5 of 1984. The learned trial Judge in the judgment being appealed against sentenced the Appellant and two others to death after finding each of them guilty of the offences preferred against them. The criminal proceeding against the Appellant and others tried along with him was initiated by the Attorney-General of Niger State through one of the officers in his Department. The Appellant was arrested several weeks after the occurrence of the crime he was charged with and though he made a confessional statement to the police, he retracted the same during trial.

The Appellant being dissatisfied with his conviction and sentence appealed to this Court by a Notice of Appeal filed on 9/8/2005. The said Notice of Appeal contained nine grounds. The Appellant filed an Amended Notice of Appeal pursuant to the order of Court granted in that regard on 7th November, 2006. The Amended Notice of Appeal contains seven grounds of appeal and the said grounds without their particulars read thus: –

“GROUND 1

The Hon. Trial court erred in law when it tried, convicted and sentenced the Appellant on a charge under the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act not signed and preferred by the Attorney General of the Federation.

GROUND 2

The learned trial court erred in law when it convicted the Appellant solely on the retracted confessional statement of the Appellant uncorroborated with any reliable independent evidence.

GROUND 3

The learned trial court erred in law when it did not test the truthfulness of the purported confessional statement of the Appellant before relying solely on it to convict the Appellant.

GROUND 4

The learned trial court erred in law when it convicted and sentenced the Appellant for conspiracy and Armed Robbery in the absence of properly conducted identification parade and proper evidence of identification.

GROUND 5

The learned trial court erred in law when it held that the prosecution has proved his case beyond reasonable doubt.

GROUND 6