Kunle Shonubi V. People Of Lagos State (2015)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ABIMBOLA OSARUGUE OBASEKI-ADEJUMO, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal is against the judgment of Oluwayemi, J. of the High Court of Lagos delivered on the 3rd December, 2010, wherein the Appellant was found guilty of murder under Section 316 of the Criminal Code Law of Lagos State 2003 Cap C17 Vol. 2 and was sentenced to death by hanging.

The Appellant being dissatisfied with the judgment appealed to this court via a Notice of Appeal dated 2nd March, 2011.

The facts of the case was that on 4th January, 2007 one Wilma Steen came back from shopping with her friend and found her daughter Miss Annuimeke Steen in her bath with tap running and the bath full of water. She raised an alarm which attracted a call for help of security men on ground, including Policemen attached to Shell Nigeria Exploration Petroleum Company and Medical team around who confirm the girl dead.

Due to cause of her death, the environment was cordoned and (9) nine suspects were arrested; but only the Appellant was arraigned as a result of the outcome or forensic analysis carried out both in Nigeria and United Kingdom.

Upon the information filed on 20th November, 2008, the Respondent called 13 witnesses while Appellant testified and called (3) three other witnesses. At the end of the trial, the court found from the scientific evidence, Prosecution Witnesses as well as the surrounding circumstances that the Appellant was guilty of the alleged crime. The trial Judge therefore convicted him to death by hanging.

Appellant filed 12 grounds of appeal and argued same in the brief of argument dated and filed 14th February, 2014. It was settled by Sikiru Akinrele of S. F. Akinrele & Co., while Respondents brief is dated and filed on 13th October, 2014 but deemed on 23/10/14. Same was settled by Ade Ipaye Esq., Honourable Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice Lagos State; E. I. Alakija (Mrs.) (D. DPP); Adebayo Haruna Esq. and E. R. Agu (Mrs.).

The Appellant also filed a reply on points of law dated and filed on 6/2/15.

The Appellant formulated (11) eleven issues for determination thus:

(i) Whether exhibit D, the forensic analysis carried out by some 38 scientist, none of whom was called as witness but tendered by a 3rd party who was not a member of the team and did not participate in the research does not amount to documentary hearsay evidence and thus admissible – Ground One.

(ii) Whether from the Record of the court, the Appellant did not give clear evidence of the movement throughout the day of the incident – Ground Two

(iii) Whether the evidence of the Appellant that he went to flat 503 to use hot water to take his bath was refuted and made him guilty of the charges for murder – Ground Three

(iv) Whether the evidence of PW11 that she saw the Appellant on her corridor while she was in front of flat 302 opposite 303 coming up and going upstairs was so unequivocal and amounts to entering or coming out of flat 303 where the alleged murder was committed – Ground four

(v) Whether the trial judge was right in that the Appellant left the premises immediately after the incident without permission and thereby liable for the charge of murder -Ground Five