James Ufor V. The State (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MASSOUD ABDULRAHMAN OREDOLA, J.C.A.(Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal is against the judgment of the Enugu State High Court sitting at Enugu, delivered on the 5th day of February, 2002 in Charge No. E/5ART/98. The facts of the case are as follows: Sometimes in 1998 and as a result of armed robbery incident which took place sometimes in 1997, the appellant, James Ufor, was the second accused person among the accused persons who were arraigned before the Robbery and Firearms Tribunal of Enugu State holden at Enugu on a two (2) count charge of criminal conspiracy and armed robbery, contrary to Section 5(b) and 1(2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, Cap. 398 Vol. XXII, Laws of the Federation of Nigerian, 1990.

Upon being charged and with their pleas having been taken and in the course of the hearing before the Armed Robbery and Firearms Tribunal, the 3rd and 8th accused persons thereat were discharged therefrom at the instance of the Tribunal and the Prosecution, respectively. The above stated facts happened in recent past. Now to the present case which gave rise to this instant appeal.

?The

1

appellant and five (5) other accused persons were re-arraigned before the High Court of Enugu State, holden at Enugu (hereinafter referred to as the lower Court) on a one count charge of armed robbery, contrary to Section (2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, Cap. 398 Vol. XXII, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990. The said armed robbery incident was alleged to have taken place on the 21st day of April, 1997 at Mile 17 along Enugu – Abakaliki Express Road, around 7:00pm ? 7:30pm.

At the hearing, on the 7th day of July, 1999 to be precise, the Appellant and each of the other accused persons pleaded ?not guilty? to the charge. Hearing in the case commenced on 4th October, 1999. The prosecution called eight (8) witnesses and closed its case. Similarly, the accused persons on the whole and inclusive of the appellant herein called eight (8) defence witnesses. After the close of the case for the defence, learned counsel for both parties addressed the trial Court. At the end of it all, the learned trial judge found and concluded thus:

?In the final analysis, this Court finds the present charge not proved

2

against the 1st accused, the 3rd accused and 6th accused persons. They are therefore each discharged and acquitted. In this case of the 2nd accused, the 4th accused and 5th accused persons, this Court finds each of them guilty as charged.

The second accused person is therefore hereby convicted of the offence of armed robbery. The 4th accused person is also convicted of the offence of armed robbery, as is the 5th accused person also convicted of the offence of armed robbery.”

The convicted accused persons inclusive of the appellant herein were sentenced to death by hanging.

The appellant in this case was dissatisfied with the said decision of the trial Court and as a result thereof, filed an appeal against the decision vide a Notice of Appeal filed on the 14th day of November, 2003. The said Notice of Appeal was struck out for being incompetent as it was signed by the appellant?s counsel and not the appellant. Howbeit, by a Motion on Notice filed on the 17th day of March, 2014 and granted on the 18th day of November, 2014, time was extended for the appellant to file his Notice of Appeal and the appellant?s Notice of Appeal

3