Mrs Patience Ayo V. The State (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

UWANI MUSA ABBA AJI, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the judgment of Edo State High Court sitting at Abudu presided over by Hon. Justice M.l. Edokpayi in charge No. HAB/7C/2000.

The Appellant was arraigned before the court on one count information of murder punishable under Section 319(1) of the Criminal Code Cap 48 Vol. II Laws of Bendel State of Nigeria 1976 as applicable to Edo State.

In the particulars of the offence, it was stated that the Appellant on or about 3rd day of March, 1998 at Urhonigbe in Abudu judicial Division, murdered Osamudiamen Ayo.

The Appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge. The prosecution called four (4) witnesses. The Appellant testified in her own defence but did not call any witness. At the close of trial, in a well considered judgment delivered on the 27th September, 2001, the learned trial Judge found the Appellant guilty as charged and sentenced her to death by hanging. This is what the learned trial Judge said while sentencing the Appellant at page 67 lines 22 – 35 and page 68 lines 1 – 10 of the Records of Appeal.

“I hold that the death of the deceased resulted from the injuries sustained from the matchet cuts inflicted on him on the left parietal region of his head by the voluntary act of the accused person. See the following cases:-

1. Tona Buhari vs. the State (1965) NMLR/83
2. Inyere Akpuenya vs. The State (1976) 11 SC 269 at 278
3. Aneji Irek vs. The State (1976) 4 SC 67.

I hold that the accused person intended to kill the deceased and that she killed him. I am satisfied that the deceased died from no other cause or causes but from the injuries caused to him by the accused person. Again, as stated by the Supreme Court in Paul Onye vs. The State at page 81 (supra).

“Now every man is presumed to intend the natural consequences of his deliberate act. A knife is an instrument which when used as Appellant did in this case, can cause death or grievous bodily harm. There is no excuse, or justification borne out of the facts and circumstances of this case.”

Finally, in the result and in view of the foregoing, I hold that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. I am satisfied that from the evidence before me, the accused person deliberately murdered the deceased.

The sentence of the Court upon you is that you shall be hanged by the neck until you are dead. May the Lord have mercy on your soul.”

The Appellant being dissatisfied with her conviction and sentence, filed an appeal to this court on a lone ground of appeal vide a notice and grounds of appeal dated 19th October, 2001. Pursuant to the leave of this court granted on the 23/3/2004, the Appellant filed an amended notice of appeal containing three additional grounds of appeal and renumbering the original ground of appeal as ground NO.4.

The grounds of appeal are hereby reproduced without their particulars:-

“GROUNDS OF APPEAL

1. The learned trial Judge erred in law by not properly and exhaustively considering the defences open to the accused/Appellant under the Law.
2. The learned trial Judge erred in law by relying on the part of the confessional statement favourable to the prosecution’s case and rejecting the part favourable to the Appellant.
3. The learned trial Judge erred in law when he held that murder charge was proved beyond reasonable doubt.
4. The decision/judgment of the learned trial Judge is unwarranted, unreasonable having regard to the evidence.” In compliance with the Rules and Practice of this court, parties filed and exchanged briefs of argument. In the Appellant’s brief settled by M.K. Agienoji, Esq, Learned counsel distilled two issues for determination, viz:-

“1. Whether the alleged confession extracted from the Appellant was sufficient to ground conviction for murder having regard to the defences available to the Appellant which ought to have exculpated her.