FABIAN NWATURUOCHA AND THE STATE

SUBJECT MATTER: Criminal Law

Armed Robbery: How the crime is established: essential ingredients of same.

Alibi: How same is established and when the plea will be discountenanced by the court.

Identification Parade: When same is not essential to grant conviction.

Concurrent findings of  lower courts: when the Supreme Court will not tamper with same.

 

Alibi means elsewhere. It is the duty of an accused person who pleads it to furnish sufficient particulars of same .He must furnish his whereabouts and those present with him at the material time. It is then left for the prosecution to disprove same. Failure to investigate may lead to an acquittal” Per Akinbiyi JSC.

Proof beyond reasonable doubt should not be stretched beyond reasonable limit. Otherwise it will cleave” Per J.A. Fabiyi JSC.

Click Here to View Case

Advertisements

EMMANUEL EKE V. THE STATE

SUBJECT MATTER:

Criminal Law: Armed robbery; essential ingredient of same.

Alibi: Duty of the accused person to furnish particulars of same.

Evidence:

Confessional statements: The test for admissibility of a confessional statement.

Witness’ testimony: Effect where contradictory.

Conviction: when the court can convict upon the evidence of one witness.

Practice and Procedure:

Trial-within-trial: When it should be conducted-Failure to do so.

Burden of proof: Proof beyond reasonable doubt is not proof beyond all iota of doubt.

When admissibility of a statement is challenged on the ground that it was not made voluntarily, it is incumbent on the judge to call upon the prosecutor to establish that it was voluntarily made by conducting a trial-within-trial. Such a procedural step must be taken at the point when the objection is raised

–          per Mohammed J.S.C

Click Here to View Case

MICHAEL EBEINWE V. THE STATE

CRIMINAL LAW -ARMED ROBBERY –SECTION 1(2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions ) Act

EVIDENCE: Proof in Criminal cases -beyond reasonable doubt

EVIDENCE: Discrepancy in the evidence, how the court treats same

EVIDENCE: Section 149 (d) of the Evidence Act on “evidence which could and was not produced” in court). Not helpful to the accused.

EVIDENCE: Consistency of the evidence adduced by the accused and the prosecution witnesses. How helpful to the prosecution.

ARMED ROBBERY: Statutorily and judicially defined.

PRACTICE and PROCEDURE: Concurrent findings of fact of trial and appellate courts – where perversity is not shown

Click Here to View Case