Osamede Abbey V. The State (2013)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

SIDI DAUDA BAGE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the Judgment of Hon Justice R. I. Amaize of the High Court of Justice, Edo State, holden at Benin City, in the Benin Judicial Division in Charge No.B/15C/2001 THE STATE VS OKECHUKWU MARAIRE, OSAMEDE ABBEY, FRANCIS EHEBHOLO. The Appellant and the two other accused persons in the court below were charged as follows:-

COUNT I: – That you Okechukwu Maraire, Osamede Abbey, and Francis Ehebholo on or about the 25th day of March, 1999 at Buvel Filling Station, No. 222 Murtala Mohammed Way Benin City in the Benin Judicial Division conspired with each other to commit a felony to wit: armed robbery and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 1(2)(a) of the Robbery and Fire Arms (Special Provision) Act Cap 398 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990.

COUNT II: – That you Okechukwu Maraire, Osamede Abbey, and others now at large on or about the 25th day of March, 1999 at Buvel Filling Station at No. 222, Murtala Mohammed Way Benin City in the Benin Judicial Division robbed the sum of seven hundred and sixty-four thousand, four hundred and thirty-eight naira, eighty-three kobo (N764,438.83), four hundred Dutch Mark (400 Dutch Mark), sixty-four U.S. Dollars (S64.00), fifty British Pounds Sterling (50.00pounds) and coral beads of assorted forms valued about one hundred and fifty thousand naira (N150,000.00) properties of Prince Clement Okoeguale and at the time of the robbery you were armed with a gun and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 1(2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act Cap 398 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990.

Briefly the prosecution’s case at the High Court was that:

The Appellant was the 2nd accused in the erstwhile Charge No. B/15C/2001 brought against four of them. They were charged with conspiracy and armed robbery. On the death of the erstwhile 1st accused, Appellant became the 1st accused. To prove its case, the prosecution called seven witnesses and the Appellant testified in his own defence and called no witnesses.

There were many interlocutory processes during the trial, such as trial within trial for each of the accused persons, a motion challenging jurisdiction; stay of proceedings and no case submissions made on behalf of both accused. The learned trial Judge refused each and every application made to it by the accused persons. None of the refusals was appealed against. After the evidence of the prosecution and defence, the respective counsel for the accused addressed court. Thereafter, the learned trial Judge gave Judgment. The accused persons appealed in two separate Notices of Appeal filed, however, for them by the erstwhile counsel for the 2nd accused.

The Appellant filed his Notice of Appeal dated the 11th of July 2005 containing twelve (12 grounds). From the said grounds, the Appellant distilled the following six (6) issues for determination as follows:

(1) Whether the High Court had the jurisdiction to try the accused having regard to the fact that:

(a) The condition precedent was not fulfilled because the correct format for arraignment of the accused in the High Court was not used.

(b) By trying the Accused/Appellant under a non-existent law.

(2) Whether the so-called confessional statement which was the only evidence before the court and by which the Accused/Appellant was convicted was not so tainted because it was riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions and therefore not cogent enough to ground the conviction of the Accused/Appellant in the trial.

(3) Whether the confessional statement was not itself inadmissible because it was coercively extracted from the Accused/Appellant and therefore expungeable

(4) Whether as in the case in hand, the confessional statements of Accused/Appellant inter-se and evidence of PW3, Thomas Iyere are not so contradictory and inconsistent with one another as not to be sufficient to ground the conviction of the Accused/Appellant.