Owolabi v. State (2022)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

EMMANUEL AKOMAYE AGIM, J.S.C. (Delivering the Lead Judgment)

This appeal No. SC.1042C/2019 was commenced on 26-3-2019 when the appellant herein filed a notice of appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on 28-11-2018 in Appeal No. CA/AK/62C/2014 affirming the trial Court’s conviction of the appellant for murder and his sentence to death in the judgment delivered on 20-12-2013 in Charge No. AK/5C/2011.

By a motion on notice filed on 25-11-2019, the appellant applied for extension of time to seek leave to appeal against the said Court of Appeal judgment, leave to appeal against the judgment, extension of time to so appeal and an order deeming the second notice of appeal he filed on 25-11-2019 as properly filed and served. This Court on 4-2-2021 granted this application as prayed. So the second notice of appeal was deemed filed on 4-2-2021.

Both sides have filed, exchanged and adopted their respective briefs as follows – appellant’s brief, respondent’s brief and appellant’s reply brief.

The appellant’s brief raised the following issues for determination –

“1. Whether the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was the person who killed the deceased and also stabbed the PW1 (Distilled from grounds 1, 2, 3, 9 and 11).

2. Whether the Court below was right when it affirmed the findings of the trial Court that the appellant stabbed PW1 and the deceased (Distilled from grounds 4, 6, 7 and 8)
3. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in affirming the decision of the trial Court admitting the medical report (Exhibit P9) in evidence (Distilled from ground 5)
4. Whether the discountenancing of the extra judicial statement and oral testimony of the appellant as found by the trial Court and upheld by the lower Court is right in law (Distilled from ground 10)”

The respondent’s brief raised the following issues for determination –
“1. Whether from the facts and circumstances of this case together with the totality of the evidence led by the prosecution during the trial before the trial Court and reviewed by the Lower Court in its judgment affirming the findings of the trial Court, the prosecution did not successfully prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Appellant killed the deceased and stabbed the PW1. (Distilled from grounds 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 11 of the grounds of appeal from which appellant’s issues 1 & 2 were formulated).

2. Whether the lower Court was right when it affirmed the decision of the trial Court admitting the Medical Report (Exhibit P9) in evidence. (Distilled from ground 5 of the grounds of appeal from which appellant’s issue 3 is formulated)
3. Whether from the facts and evidence x-rayed by the trial Court and affirmed by the lower Court in its judgment, the trial Court was not entitled in law to discountenance the extra judicial statement and oral testimony made by the appellant. (Distilled from Ground 10 of the grounds of appeal from which appellant’s issue 4 is formulated)”

I will determine this appeal on the basis of the issues for determination raised in the appellant’s brief.

Let me start with issue No. 1 which asks “Whether the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was the person who killed the deceased and also stabbed the PW1”.

This issue raises a general question of whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. This issue is incompetent and not valid for consideration for the reason that it is not a valid question in an appeal to this Court against the concurrent findings of facts of two or more lower Courts.

The only questions that such an appeal can validly raise for determination in this Court are, whether any of the findings of facts are perverse or contrary to the evidence or made in violation of principle of law or procedure resulting in a miscarriage of justice. This is because the scope of the appellate power of this Court is limited to the determination of these questions.

The scope of the appellate power of this Court in appeals to it against the concurring findings of facts by the Court of Appeal is a very limited one and is not wide enough to allow it consider general questions such as whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
​
This Court has over several decades consistently held in several decisions that it has no power to disturb or interfere with the concurrent findings of lower Courts except where the findings have been shown to be perverse or contrary to the evidence or made in violation of some principle of substantive law or procedure resulting in injustice. See for example Okoye & Anor. v. Obiaso & Ors. (2010) LPELR-2507 (SC) Agala & Ors. v. Okusin & Ors. (2010) LPELR-221 (SC), Amadi v. Nwosu (1992) LPELR-442 (SC), Eholor v. Osayande (1992) 7 SCNJ 217 and Osho v. Foreign Finance Corporation & Anor. (1991) 5 SC 59.

Issue No. 1 and the arguments of same are hereby struck out.

Let me now determine issue No. 2 which asks “Whether the Court below was right when it affirmed the findings of the trial Court that the appellant stabbed PW1 and the deceased”.