Adebayo Adeyemi V. The State (1993)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

U. OMO, J.S.C.

The appellant in this appeal was originally charged at the High Court of Lagos on 1st July 1986 with the murder of one Subulola King at Abule Ijesha, Lagos on the 21st of January, 1986. At the end of the trial he was found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to a term of three years imprisonment on 19th February, 1987. He then appealed to the Court of Appeal which confirmed his conviction and sentence. It is against that decision that he has appealed to this Court.

From the seven grounds of appeal filed in support of this appeal, appellant’s counsel has distilled three issues for determination which are set out thus:

(i) At a stage of the submission of no case to answer by counsel to the appellant could the learned trial Judge ask the appellant to defend himself on a charge of manslaughter while discharging him of the offence of murder?

(ii) That if this is so, was it necessary to take his plea on that charge?

(iii) Is the charge against the appellant proved beyond reasonable doubt in the light of the evidence adduced?

The issues for determination as seen by the respondent, though couched in different language, and with a different slant, are not really dissimilar. They are stated as follows:

(i) Whether the ruling by the learned trial Judge in the no case submission on the murder charge that a prima facie case of manslaughter and not murder had been made out against the appellant – tantamounted to an amendment or substitution of the said charge requiring a fresh plea from the appellant.

(ii) Whether the trial Judge and the Court of Appeal were right in holding that the act of the appellant which resulted in the death of the deceased was an act of negligence for which the appellant was criminally liable in manslaughter.

Thus, it can be seen that appellant’s issues (i) and (ii) are substantially the same as issue (i) of the respondent; and that issue (iii) of the appellant and issue (ii) of the respondent are the same.

The first set of issues complain of the procedure adopted by the learned trial Judge and raise points of law which are indeed rather novel. As stated earlier, the appellant was charged with the offence of murder. The charge was duly read to him and he pleaded not guilty thereto. After the prosecution had called its eight witnesses and a visit to the locus in quo had been conducted, appellant’s counsel made a submission of no case on behalf of his client, the main point of which was that on the evidence before the Court no prima facie case of murder had been established. In his reserved ruling the learned trial Judge agreed with appellant’s counsel’s submission, when he held that-

“Upon a calm view of the prosecution’s evidence, I cannot find facts which tend to prove the essential elements of the offence of murder. The evidence at this point, even if I believe it is such that the accused cannot be convicted of murder upon it. The evidence points to an offence of manslaughter. Therefore, I am unable to find that a prima facie case has been made out against the accused on the charge of murder sufficiently to warrant the accused being asked to defend himself.”

(Italics mine)

He however went further to state that-