EVIDENCE – CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – Position of the law on the admissibility or otherwise of confessional statements
“In all criminal cases before a Court of law in this country, there are always two sides: the case for the Prosecution and the case for the defence. Consequently, regardless of where or in what manner an accused person makes his statement to the Police or other law enforcement agents, the attitude of the Courts towards it remains the same. It comes to this. It is a part of the case for the Prosecution, whether or not it is a confessional statement and whether or not the accused person challenges it during the trial, Egboghonome v State (1993) 7 NWLR (pt. 306) 383. The question of its admissibility is a separate issue entirely. Now, on the issue of admissibility, two factors can affect the admissibility of a confessional statement, that is, where the confessional statement has been found not to be voluntarily made or where the contents of the confessional statement are retracted by its alleged maker. In the former, where an objection is raised, the proper action to take by the Courts is to suspend the substantive suit and immediately commence the conduct of a trial-within-trial to determine the voluntariness or non- voluntariness of the confessional statement. Whereas, in the latter case, the confessional statement can still be admitted and the issue will go to the evaluation of the statement and the ascription of probative value to be placed on same, Kanu v King (1952) 14 WACA 30; Idowu v State 12 NWLR (pt. 680) 48; Mumuni v State (1975) 6 SC 79; Galadima v State (2012) LPELR – 15530 (SC). The proper time to raise objection on any of these grounds in at the point it is being tendered, Oseni v State (2012) 2 M. J. S. C (pt 11) 98; Effiong v The State (1998) 5 SCNJ 158, 166; Gbadamosi v The State (1992) 9 NWLR (pt 266) 465, 480; Afolalu v State 3 NWLR (pt 11270) 160, 193; Alarape v The State (2001) 5 NWLR (pt 705) 79; Mbang v The State (2009) 8 NWLR (pt 1170) 140; Okaroh v State (1990) 1 NWLR (pt 125) 136. In the instant case, the confessional statements, exhibits 2, 2A and 7 of the appellant were tendered by the Prosecution. They were admitted in evidence without any objection on any of the aforementioned grounds. It was during trial that the appellant made, as submitted by learned counsel to the respondent and which I so hold, a belated attempt to impeach the voluntariness of exhibits 2, 2A and 7. This, in my opinion could not avail the appellant at this point, Oseni v State (supra); Effiong v The State (supra); Gbadamosi v The State (supra); Afolalu v State (supra); Alarape v The State (supra); Mbang v The State (supra); Okaroh v State (supra).” Per CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE, JSC in AKINKUNMI v. STATE (2022-LCER-46533-SC) (Pp 9 – 11; Paras C – C)
Facts
FACTS:
The appellant, who was the second accused person at the Abeokuta Judicial Division of the High Court of Ogun State, was arraigned alongside three other accused persons, on a four-count charge of Conspiracy to commit Armed Robbery, Armed Robbery and Attempted Armed Robbery contrary to Sections 6 (b), 1 (2)(a) and 2 (2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act Cap R11 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.
At the trial, the appellant pleaded not guilty to all charges. The Prosecution called eight (8) witnesses and tendered exhibits in proof of their case. In their defence, the appellant and his co-accused persons testified for themselves and their Counsel addressed the Court. The trial Court, in its judgment delivered on the 19th day of October, 2015, convicted and sentenced the appellant to death by hanging. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal. By a judgment delivered on the 6th day of December, 2019, the Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal hence this further appeal to the Apex Court.
Issues
The appeal was determined on the following issues:
1. Whether the lower Court was right in affirming the trial Court’s acceptance of and reliance on the appellant’s confessional statements; and
2. Whether the lower Court was right in affirming the trial Court’s conviction and sentence of the appellant.
Lead Judge(ment)
CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)
Held
The appeal was unanimously dismissed. The concurrent conviction and sentence of the appellant were further affirmed.
Alternate Citations
(2022) LPELR-57285(SC)
Read Full Judgment
Counsel:
YEMI A. ADESINA, ESQ.
For Appellant(s)
Absent
For Respondent
For Appellant(s)
For Respondent(s)
Counsel’s Photograph(s) Needed.