NIGERIAN CASES/JUDGMENTS ON CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE (11)
POLICY, PRACTICE & PUBLISHING LAW REPORTS, 3PLR
FIND JUDGMENTS BY:
NIGERIAN CASES/JUDGMENTS ON CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE (11)
[Judgment(s) are listed and published here for free but can be procured in electronic PDF copies for a fee in singles or compendium. Research support is also available. Email us through lawnigeria@gmail.com and info@lawnigeria.com or text 07067102097]
| TITLE | MAIN ISSUES |
| TAJUDEEN ILIYASU V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – CULPABLE HOMICIDE:- What prosecution is obliged to prove under section 221 of the Penal Code to sustain a charge of culpable homicide – Whether ingredients for proof of the offence of culpable homicide are the same with the ingredients of the offence of murder under the Criminal Code CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – DEFENCE OF ALIBI:- When the defence of alibi would avail an accused person – Need to raise defence at the earliest opportunity – Need to offer the Police an opportunity either to confirm or refute the truth of alibi raised– When a burden is cast on the Prosecution to investigate an alibi – Whether failure to investigate the defence of alibi raised unambiguously at the earliest opportunity will lead to an acquittal – Whether the defence of alibi can be raised for the time during trial |
| TAMBARI MAIJAMAA V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Northern Nigeria – Culpable homicide punishable with death -Concerted attack. |
| TAOFEEK ADELEKE V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF ROBBERY AND CONSPIRACY:- How conspiracy may be formed – Whether it is necessary that conspirators must know each other before the offence of conspiracy can be established – Ingredients of the offence of robbery – Whether circumstantial evidence can be used to establish the offence of robbery and conspiracy to commit robbery |
| TEMPLE NWANKWOALA V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – OFFENCE OF CORRUPTION:- Ingredients of the offence – Section 135 of the Evidence Act 2011 – Requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt – Proof that accused or offender is a public Officer within the meaning of S.2 of the 2000 Act – When an essential element- What prosecution must prove to succeed |
| THE KING V. LOVEGROVE – CWL | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Unlawful killing – Using Instruments with intent to procure Abortion – Evidence of similar user on another Woman – Admissibility |
| THE NIGERIA AIR FORCE V. EX-SQN LEADER M. O KAMALDEEN | |
| THE NIGERIAN AIR FORCE V. EX-WING COMMANDER L.D. JAMES | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – PROSECUTION: Proof of crime – Whether the law imposes on the prosecution the duty both the prosecution and defence |
| THE QUEEN V, GIDADO AKANBI | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Death arising from gunshot inflicted by accused at request of deceased – Masquerader wishing to test strength of his charms at a funeral ceremony – Whether act was done in prosecution of unlawful purpose and of such nature as to be likely to endanger human life thus amounting to murder under section 254 (3) of Criminal Code, Cap. 28 |
| THE STATE V. IYABO ALBERT | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof of – Failure to connect accused with cause of death – Accused discharged- Frivolous and spurious appeal arising therefrom by prosecution – attitude of court thereof CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Statement to the effect that prosecution has closed its case – where no prima facie case is shown to have been made out thereafter – Whether adjournment is still open to prosecution – How treated |
| THE STATE V. SALIHU MOHAMMED GWONTO | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – Right to an Interpreter: Statutory provisions which provides for an accused person, the right to an interpreter. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – Duplicity in Charges: Circumstances under which a court of appeal will not interfere on an issue of duplicity |
| THEOPHILUS EYISI V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW:– Record of plea of guilt of an accused – Where proved to be contrary – Effect of. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Collective conviction and sentence – Whether amounts to miscarriage of justice CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Defences – defence of alibi – Need to adduced evidence in support – Circumstances under which police need not investigate |
| THOMAS WILHELM WEIDT V. INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Defendant charged with illegal entry into Nigeria and obtaining money by fraud – Immigration Act (cap. 84, Laws of Nigeria) 1963-Pleas of guilty entered in respect of both counts Failure of magistrate to hear explanation from defendant-Findings of guilty recorded-Defendant having nothing to say in allocutus-Defendant not represented by counsel-Duly of magistrate in such circumstances-Validity of conviction. |
| TREACY V. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS | Crime – Blackmail – Demand – When and where made – Letter demanding money with menace – Posted in England to person abroad – Whether demand made in England -Theft Act 1968 (c. 60), s. 21 (1) |
| UBANI V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: – Proof of Murder – Ingredients which must be proved – Direct and Circumstantial evidence – What prosecution needs to proof to ground conviction CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: – Medical evidence – Whether sine qua non in proof of cause of death – When it can be dispensed with CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDUR: – Trial Court – Onus of proof – On whom lies – Misdirection by trial court thereto – Whether the onus on the prosecution to prove case as a general rule never shifts and a misdirection on the question of onus of proof is fatal unless it can be shown that on a proper direction the result would be the same – When fatal |
| UCHANWOGO V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Provocation – Proportionality of retaliation, a deciding factor |
| UCHE V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Charge – Two separate counts charging the same robbery -Conviction on both counts – Where victim named in only one of the counts – Validity of CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Northern Nigeria – Confession to police officer –Where not recorded in case diary — Oral evidence of it – When admissible under Evidence Ordinance. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Conviction based merely on guilty association – Validity of |
| UDEDIBIA AND OTHERS V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Deceased was Medical Practitioner – Deceased shot by masked man with revolver – Robbery – Confessional Statements of accused – Circumstantial evidence |
| UDO V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof of – Confessional statement – Denial of statement at trial – How treated CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Defences – Pleas of Insanity – Presumption of sanity – Statutory foundation – Where deemed not rebutted – Relevant considerations |
| UDO AKPAKPAN V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder- Ingredients – How proved – Defence of provocation – Degree and method of violence used – Effect of – How treated CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: – Murder – Wife killing using dagger – Defence of provocation – Section 318 Criminal Code – Confession of adultery without more – Words spoken – Whether sufficient provocation – Reasonable man’s test |
| UDO AKPAN UDOFIA V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Murder – Proof of |
| UDO V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Provocation – Defence of provocation – Meaning and purport of. |
| UDO V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Confessional statement – Denial of statement at trial – Insanity – Presumption of sanity |
| UDOEBRE V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE:– Circumstantial evidence – Murder case – When an accused person can be convicted of murder on the basis of circumstantial evidence. CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE – Defence of Alibi – Duty on court to consider |
| UDOFA V. THE KING | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – administration of a certain concoction to the deceased, a pregnant woman, for the purpose of securing abortion, resulting in her death – Section 316 (3) of the Criminal Code – Where death is caused by criminal act not likely to endanger human life the person concerned – When manslaughter would be an appropriate charge instead of murder – Duty of appellate court to substitute same CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Death caused by innocent agent of person knowingly committing a crime – Whether the principal who instigated the agent is criminally responsible and agent innocent – Construction of section 316 (3) of the Criminal Code |
| UDOFIA V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW:– Murder – Proof of – Defence of insanity – On whom rests the burden of proof |
| UDOFIA V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Murder – Proof – Confession of accused person – Where retracted – Whether can still support conviction – Duty of trial court thereto CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Murder trial – Plea of Self-defence – Whether only available if there was reasonable apprehension of death or grievous harm and the accused reasonably believed that the act of killing was necessary for his own protection and not that of an excitable individual killer – Test – Whether objective and not subjective: that of a reasonable man and the act which resulted in the killing must be the reaction of a reasonable person placed in similar situation CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Murder trial – Plea of Self-defence – Distinction between Self-defence and Retaliation – Whether the guiding principles of self-defence are necessity and proportion – Two questions to be posed and answered |
| UFOT MKPA ALIAS MBOSO MKPA V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: Murder – Matricide – Appeal – When there is nothing to urge in favour of convict – Appeal lacking in merit – how treated |
| UGBO V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – How proved – Where accused asserts facts tending towards delusion as motivation for the crime – Belief in witch-craft – Effect thereof – whether falls within Section 28 Criminal Code |
| UGURU V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Defences open to accused – Whether failure of judge to specifically mention the defences raised by an accused is necessarily fatal to the judgment. |
| UGWU V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof thereof – Whether conviction can be sustained on the evidence of a single witness without corroborative evidence – Propriety CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof – Corroboration of evidence – Subsequent events and conduct used as corroborating evidence by trial court – Propriety of – Attitude of appellate court CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof of motive – Whether necessary |
| UHUNMWANGHO V. OKOJIE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Fraud – Need for same to be specifically pleaded and proved – General allegations however strong – Whether insufficient to amount to an averment of fraud of which any court ought to take notice |
| UKADIKE V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW:- Murder- Proof of – Defence of insanity – Onus of proof – Whether on person asserting same – Standard of proof – Whether the kind of evidence required should rate no higher that the onus on a plaintiff or defendant in a civil suit CRIMINAL LAW:- Criminal liability – Proof of – Defence of insanity – Rule that mere absence of any evidence of motive for a crime is not a sufficient ground upon which to infer mania/insanity – Where there is as much evidence indicative of insanity rather than the opposite – Whether the absence of any evidence of motive becomes relevant to the point at issue and material to it |
| UKAOBASI AJUNWA V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Murder – Self defence – Defence of provocation – Distinction between self – defence and provocation |
| UKATA V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Where principal accused person is discharged and acquitted of offence – Conviction of Aider and Abettor of the offence convicted – Whether proper |
| UKEJE V. UKEJE | CRIMINAL LAW:- Fraud – Standard of proof of an allegation of fraud |
| UKO V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Breaking and entering – Stealing – Conviction for same – Appeal arising therefrom – How treated |
| UKONU V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Insanity – Whether violence and uncontrollable rage amount to CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Spouses – Evidence of wife against husband – When admissible |
| UKORAH V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Conviction and Sentence for murder – No Post Mortem examination of deceased’s body – No evidence as to cause of death – Dial Judge drawing inference as to Cause of Death from circumstantial evidence – Direct evidence available that accused beat up deceased with bare fists – Standard required to justify a conviction based on circumstantial evidence |
| UKPABI V. STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – MURDER:- |
| UKUT V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Rape – Prosecutrix uncorroborated evidence alone – Whether sufficient CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Legislation-Evidence Act (1958 Laws of the Federation cap. 62) s.177. Criminal Law – Accomplice evidence and warning – Defendant implicating co-defendant – Where defendant deemed an accomplice – Effect |
| UKUT V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof of – Defence of provocation – Whether desertion of matrimonial home by wife amounts to provocation |
| UMANA V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Provocation – Self-defence – When not open to accused |
| UMANI V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Defence of accused – Duty of court to consider all possible defences available to accused – Accused person’s Statement conflicting with evidence and raising possible evidence of self defence or provocation – Duty of court CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Proof of crime – Accused raising alibi – Onus on prosecution to disprove same – Court upholding alibi of all but one of accused persons – Whether conviction proper |
| UMESI V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof thereof – Conviction based on confessional statement – Desirability of finding corroborating evidence outside confession CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Confessional statements – Where an accused is to be convicted solely on a confessional statement- Principles governing. |
| UMEZE V. THE STATE I | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Jurisdiction of Magistrate Court – Where ousted – Effect on trial – Whether a mere nullity – Discretion of Director of Public prosecutions – Whether includes fresh trial |
| UMEZE V. THE STATE II | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Jurisdiction – Proper avenue for trial – Possibility of bias – False evidence – How treated |
| UMODU V. C.O.P | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Charge of being in possession of seditious publications – Consolidation of Criminal Appeals – Propriety — Power to consolidate Criminal Appeals – Effect of illegal consolidation – Relevant considerations |
| UMOLE V. I.G.P. | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Accomplice —Corroboration — Co-accused pleading guilty and giving evidence against other accused persons —Desirability of his being sentenced before giving evidence — Whether failure to take this course vitiates conviction of other accused |
| UMOREA V. C.O.P. | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Person charged with removing evidence contrary to Section 107 Criminal Code – How treated |
| UMOREN V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: – Murder – Deceased allegedly spitting on accused person – Whether sufficient defence of provocation |
| UMOREN V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Proof of crime – Evidence relied on – Where wrongly admitted – Other available evidence sustaining conviction – Effect CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Evidence wrongly admitted at trial – Remaining evidence leaving no doubt – Effect |
| UMORU V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: Murder – Breaking and entering – propriety of inference that persons who broke into store were murderers CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: Identification parade – Whether accused persons being identified by different persons affects its validity |
| UMUNNA V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof – Desertion of matrimonial home or denial of sex to husband – Whether provocation – How treated |
| UNAKALAMBA V. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Judgment of Magistrate Court – Criminal Procedure Ordinance s.245 – Format of |
| UNITED BANK OF AFRICA LIMITED V. JULIUS A. IBHAFIDON | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Civil Proceedings – Proof and onus of proof of allegation of crime – on whom it lies |
| UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT V. MONTGOMERY | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Sentencing CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Appeal – Criminal cause or matter – Restraint orders made for purpose of aiding enforcement of external confiscation order – Judge subsequently setting aside restraint orders – Whether Court of Appeal, Civil Division having jurisdiction to entertain appeal against judge’s decision – Whether judge’s decision in a `criminal cause or matter’- Supreme Court Act 1981, s 18(1)(a). |
| UPETIRE V. A.G. WESTERN NIGERIA | CRIMINAL LAW:- Murder – relevant considerations for conviction – plea of insanity – how discharged CRIMINAL LAW:- Defences and Pleas – Insanity: incapacity to control one’s action – Ailment of geroderm- Conduct of defendant showing calculation, and killing in revenge. |
| URAKU V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Defence of provocation – Elements of provocation – 5.283, Criminal Code, Cap. 30 Laws of Eastern Nigeria, 1963. |
| USAN V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Jurisdiction of Courts in Criminal cases – Offences committed in a jurisdiction – Tried in another jurisdiction – Propriety, in view of Sections 64 and 70 Criminal Procedure Law |
| USMAN MAIGARI V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW- MURDER:- Ingredients of the offence of murder – Proof of – Ways prosecution may establish that the act of the appellant was the cause of death – Discrepancies in the evidence of prosecution witnesses – When will affect conviction of accused person – Whether circumstantial evidence can ground a conviction |
| USO V. C.O.P. | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Professional ethics – Allowance of prosecution to conduct case – Accusatorial in nature – No right to take over duties of prosecution 6y the Judge – Violates impartiality rule. |
| USUMAN ACIDA V. THE KING | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Appeal – Trial proceedings conducted by Sharia/Mohammedan law – Attorney-General’s direction to Supreme Court to review under section 5 (1) of such Ordinance not necessary in homicide cases |
| UTTEH V. STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – “Accomplice” – Categories of CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – Admission -Admission by conduct – Inference of – When it will be raised. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – Offence of demanding with menace with intent to steal – Section 406 of the Criminal Code – Ingredients of. |
| UTUK V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Defence of provocation – Where accused alleges unfair treatment – Whether sufficient provocation. |
| UWA V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof thereof – Sentencing proceedings – Sentence of death – Age of offender at time of conviction as distinct from time of offence – Which applies for the reckoning of age of accused person to determine if he is a minor or adult |
| UWAKWE V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Criminal Law – Causing death by dangerous driving contrary to S.17(2) Road Traffic Law Cap. 116 Vol. 6 Laws of Eastern Nigeria, 1963 – Appellant first offender – Power of Supreme Court to reduce sentence under S.26(3) Supreme Court Act Appeal on ground of severity or excessiveness of sentence – How treated |
| UWAWAH V. EKWEJUNOR-ETCHIE | |
| UWELE V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Prejudice and abhorrence for twins – Whether a defence |
| UZOR V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Defence of provocation – When it will not avail accused |
| UZUKWU V. UZUKWU | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Notice of trial to person committed for trial – LEGISLATION – CRIMINAL PROCEDURE,’ACT, s. 349 (1) – How treated |
| UZORUKWU V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder-Accused without a counsel – 5.352 Criminal Procedure Ordinance – Duty of Court |
| VALLANCE V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: – Unlawfully wounding a girl – Proper direction to be given to jury |
| VASQUEZ V. R O’NEIL V. R | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Provocation – Burden of proof – Belize Criminal Code placing burden of proving provocation on accused – Belize Constitution incorporating presumption of innocence until proof of guilt established – Whether burden of proof of provocation on accused – Whether Criminal Code in conflict with Constitution |
| VICTOR ONYEMAECHI OKOH V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW – MURDER: – Ingredients of – Conviction under a wrong law – Whether fatal to prosecution |
| VINCENT OGUERI V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW – BAIL:– Application for bail – Need for courts to be unfettered in considering application for bail of person accused of the offence of murder. |
| W O. MUMUNI AND ORS V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Conspiracy, forgery, stealing, uttering, etc.- Fourteen persons altogether charged – Four persons discharged for want of evidence – Conviction of 9th accused based on extra-judicial statements of co-accused -Whether proper CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Proof of crime – Where at end of case for prosecution no evidence exists against accused-Whether proper to call for his defence – S. 22 (4) Constitution of the Federation. |
| WAGGA V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Proof of – Deposition of medical practitioner – Medical report – Admissibility in evidence – Section 249(1) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code – Whether it was competent for the Court to read the deposition of a registered medical practitioner without proving that he had left the country or was not available to give evidence – Effect |
| WAHABI ALAO LAWAL V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Evidence of bad character of accused – Admissibility of – Principles applicable CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Jury trial – Direction by trial Judge to jury on inconsistencies in evidence of prosecution – Propriety of |
| WALLACE-JOHNSON V. THE KING | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Sedition – Newspaper article – Seditious intention – Whether incitement to violence not a necessary ingredient of crime of sedition – Criminal Code (Gold Coast), c. 29, s. 330, sub-s. 2 (b), (e), sub-s. 8 (now s. 326, sub-s. 2 (b), (e), sub-s. 8, of the Criminal Code, 1936 Revision, c. 9) – Construction. |
| WAPOO V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – MURDER:- Self-defence against provoked assault – Section 287, Criminal Code, Cap.42 – Onus of proof – On whom it lies. |
| WHENTON V. THE KING | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder proceedings – Joint trial of accused persons – Discretion of the judge to be exercised judicially – Appellate Court will not interfere unless it appears that a miscarriage of justice has resulted from joint trial-Misdirection – Cautioned statement by second Appellant implicating first Appellant admitted against the first Appellant where second Appellant has given evidence and denied making the statement |
| WILCOX V. JEFFERY | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Aiding and abetting criminal activity of an illegal alien – Paying for and enjoying a musical performance which included a segment by an illegal alien – Reporting in a laudatory manner for publication such performance – How treated |
| WILKINSON V. BARKING CORPORATION | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Examination of exhibit by trial Judge outside court – Whether examination amounts to investigation or trial -Whether proper |
| WILLIAM ECHEM V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Defence of Insanity – Uncontrollable impulse – Criminal Code, section 28. – How proved – Whether the burden of proof which rests upon an accused person to establish the defence of insanity is not as heavy as that which rests upon the prosecution when proving its case against an accused person – Whether not higher than the burden which rests on a plaintiff or defendant in civil proceedings. |
| WILLIAM V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses – Effect of Accused in giving evidence adopted statement he had made to Police – Whether proper |
| WILLIAMS AND OTHERS V. SUMMERFIELD (1972) 2 Q.B. 513. | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses – Effect of Accused in giving evidence adopted statement he had made to Police – Whether proper |
| WILLIAMS V. STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Criminal Justice in Nigeria -Innocence of accused – Presumption of CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – Defences – Defence of accused – Duty of court to consider any defence open to accused CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Identification parade- Purpose of – When unnecessary to conduct |
| WILLIAMS V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Verdict by jury – Jury informed as Judges of fact to accept one of appellant’s version of the incident – Appellant’s appeal against conviction that defences were not considered adequately by jury |
| WILLIE V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW – MURDER:- Proof of – Murder weapon – When relevant |
| WILSON V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – RAPE:- Count of Rape in information – Absence of count of indecent assault – Whether accused precluded from pleading thereto – Section 175 Criminal Procedure Ordinance. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Graver and lesser offence in same information but graver offence encompassing lesser offence – Conviction for both – Propriety CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Plea of guilty to lesser but not to graver offence in an information – Duty of trial Judge |
| WOGHIREN V. QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – Murder- Body not found – Effect – Use of circumstantial evidence – Applicable test |
| YAKUBU IBRAHIM V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Meaning of proof beyond reasonable doubt – Addition of charge to a substantive charge: When it may be done |
| YAKUBU V. CHIEF OF NAVAL STAFF | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Court Martial – finding of facts by same – Whether same precluded from giving reasons for its decision by section 141 of the Armed Forces Decree No. 105, 1993 CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Evidence of prosecution witnesses – Contradiction therein which were not resolved at the trial court- How appellate court will resolve same CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Proof – proof of guilt of accused person – Duty on prosecution to establish same beyond reasonable doubt. |
| YALWA V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Culpable homicide punishable with death – Evidence of Provocation not considered by trial court — Effect — Penal Code ss. 221; 222. |
| YANOR V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Culpable homicide contrary to section 221 of the Penal Code (Northern Nigeria) – Prosecution’s onus to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt – Murder trial continued though defending counsel absent – Defendant witness difficult to locate for service – Refusal of request for further adjournment to call witness – When proper – Alibi – Relevant considerations – Evidential burden on defendant |
| YARA V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Appellant joining in beating deceased but not taking part in killing – Assisting in disposing of dead body – Whether liable for murder CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: – Murder – Common intention – Absence of – Effect |
| YARO V. THE STATE | |
| YARO V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Murder – Defence of Alibi – Trial by Jury Misdirection to the Jury |
| YARZABAINA V. KANO N. A. | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – MURDER:- Conviction before a sharia court – Judicial confessions – Need to call evidence to traverse the accuracy of extra-judicial admissions |
| YAWALE SHARFAL V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE – ARRAIGNMENT: Procedures that trial court has to comply with in the arraignment of an accused – Procedure to be followed in criminal trials of jointly charged accused persons |
| YERIMA V. BORNU NA. | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Charges – Conviction – Appeal – Whether S.22(2) of the Constitution applies to appeals – Charge – Accused asked “did you commit this offence”? – Whether sufficient compliance with 5.161 of the Criminal Procedure Code. |
| YESUFU V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW:– Murder – Proof of – Where there is no eye-witness and prosecution depends on confessional statement – Duty of court and prosecution thereto CRIMINAL LAW:– Murder – Defence of Insanity – Killing motivated by delusion or belief in witchcraft – Whether proof of legal Insanity |
| YESUFU ABODUNDU V. THE QUEEN | CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND PROCEDURE:- Principles on which Federal Supreme Court will order a retrial – Section 11(2) of Federal Supreme Court (Appeals) Ordinance, Cap. 229 considered CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND PROCEDURE: Murder committed by gang of rioters – Proof of – Trial judge visit to the locus in quo to take notes – Trial judge assertion that notes and observation formed part of proceedings – Effect on overall proceedings |
| YIBORKU V. THE REPUBLIC | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Application for extension of time within which the appeal against acquittal – Appeal filed 165 days after judgment – Whether delay excessive – Principles governing the granting of application for extension of time within which to appeal. |
| YONGO V. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Where no evidence is given by accused – Conviction on plea of guilty of accused – Whether a substitution for proof of Ingredients of offence – Comparison of signature -Judgment of judge thereon – Whether sustainable without aid of expert – sec. 317 penal code – Receiving stolen property of guilty possession of stolen goods – Not to shift burden of proof to accused |
| YOUNGHUSBAND V. LUFTIG | CRIMINAL LAW:- Charge of wilfully and falsely using the title of “Doctor of Medicine,” contrary to s. 40 of the Medical Act, 1858 and with wilfully and falsely using the description “M.D.” – Medical Act, 1858 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 90), s. 40.How treated |
| YOUNGMAN V. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE NORTHERN REGION | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Conspiracy- Obtaining money by false pretences – Charge – Amendment of – Failure to call upon accused to plead thereto – Effect on the trial – Criminal Procedure Ordinance – Section 164(7) – Criminal Code – Sections, 419, 516. |
| ZACCHUS ODUNSI V. INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Motor Traffic offence – Failure to produce insurance certificate on demand – Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Ordinance section 17 (1) – Time within which insurance certificate must be produced |
| ZAKARI GONI. V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:– Double jeopardy-Putting a man to double jeopardy – Meaning and connotation of-Whether retrial order in same case amounts to putting accused to double jeopardy CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Order of retrial in criminal cases – Condition precedent to making of CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Preliminary Inquiry – Abolition of in Borno State – Effect |
| ZAMFARA STATE V. BASHIRU SULE | |
| ZEKERI ABUDU V. THE STATE | CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Proof of crime – Alibi – Delay in identification of accused – Effect- Defence of alibi – Where not contradicted or rebutted by prosecution – 1st defendant’s alibi wrongly rejected – Duty of appellate court. |
JUDGMENTS BY AREAS OF PRACTICE
JUDGMENTS BY PRACTICE/PROCEDURE ISSUES
