Sunday Adoga V. The State (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

HARUNA SIMON TSAMMANI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal is against the judgment of the Ogun state High Court of Justice, Ota Judicial Division delivered by Mobolaji A. Ojo, J on the 15th day of December, 2010. Before the trial court, the Appellant who was the 2nd accused was charged with one other with having committed the offences of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and for armed robbery which are offences punishable under Section 1(2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, Cap. R. 11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

A summary of the prosecution’s case against the Appellant has been aptly captured at paragraphs 2.1-2.7 of the Respondent’s Brief of Arguments. For the sake of understanding of the issues in the case, I intend to reprise same here. The prosecution’s case against the Appellant therefore is that, on the 01/5/2008, the PW1 and PW2 were travelling along Sango-Idiroko road via Ota when they were accosted by the Appellant and two other persons, one of whom is at large.

That at Idedo village, the Appellant and his co-conspirators flashed a police identity card at the PW1 and asked for the vehicle particulars which was obliged them by the PW1’s driver. Not satisfied, the Appellant and his partners asked the PW1 whether she was carrying any contraband and she answered in the negative. The Appellant and his partners then proceeded to search the vehicle and found the sum of three hundred and sixty-five thousand Naira (N365,000.00) in the vehicle which the PW1 wrapped in a polythene bag.

According to the prosecution, one of the assailants then pulled out a pistol and ordered the PW1 and PW2 to lie down in the bus. The accused persons then threw the money in their Nissan Bluebird car and drove off.

It is also the prosecution’s case that, the PW2 summoned courage and decided to pursue the assailants. That their pursuit paid off with the help of some police officers at a check point, they caught up with the Appellant and his co-accused who had abandoned their car in order to find an alternative way of escape, as the village they run into turned out to be a cul-de-sac. That with the help of the Baale of the village and his people, the accused persons were arrested in a river while trying to escape.

At the trial, the prosecution called three witnesses and tendered the statements of the accused persons as exhibits. The accused persons gave evidence but called no other witness. At the close of evidence, the parties filed written addresses which they adopted. In a considered judgment, the learned trial judge found the Appellant and his co-accused guilty of conspiracy and robbery simpliciter and accordingly sentenced them to various terms of imprisonment. It is against that judgment that the Appellant has appealed to this Court.

The original Notice of Appeal which was dated the 10th day of January, 2011 was filed the same day. It consisted of a lone ground of appeal. However, by motion on Notice dated the 19/4/12 and filed the 20/4/12, the Appellant was granted leave to file additional grounds of appeal. Consequently, the Appellant filed an Amended Notice of Appeal incorporating the additional grounds of appeal. The Amended Notice of Appeal consists of four grounds of appeal, which I hereby reproduce below:

Ground 1

The decision of the High Court is unreasonable, unwarranted and cannot be supported having regard to the weight of evidence.

Ground 2

The learned trial judge erred in law when he convicted the appellant for the offence of robbery.

PARTICULARS OF ERROR

(i) The evidence led by the prosecution is not sufficient to convict the accused of robbery.