Innocent Igwe V. The State (1982)
LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report
G. IRIKEFE, JSC
In this case there are two concurrent findings of fact against the appellant. There was evidence before the trial court that this appellant along with others at large, took part in the robbery the subject of the charge.
He was unmasked and the evidence of identity produced by the prosecution was accepted by the learned trial Judge. His complaint on the ground of identity to the Court of Appeal was rejected.
I find no merit in this appeal and I would also dismiss it. The conviction and sentence passed on this appellant by the trial court on 29th April, 1980, which was affirmed by the Court of Appeal on 14th April, 1981, are hereby re-affirmed.
K. ESO, JSC.: I agree there is no merit in this appeal. There have been two concurrent findings of fact against the appellant and I have seen no reason why the decision of the trial court or the Federal Court of Appeal should be interfered with.
This appeal is accordingly dismissed.
A. NNAMANI, JSC.: The appellant was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to death. This conviction and sentence were affirmed by the Federal Court of Appeal in a unanimous judgment which meticulously examined all the defences.
The case against the appellant was that 3 prosecution witnesses who were victims of the robbery saw and identified him as one of those who robbed them on that fateful night. The appellant lived at 10 Egede Street, Port Harcourt, while the robbery took place at 13 Egede Street. The main defence of the appellant was an alibi which he set up i.e. that he slept in his store that night.
I am also satisfied that both the learned trial Judge and the learned Justices of the Federal Court of Appeal correctly approached the issues relating to this plea. The appellant ought to have given more particulars of his alibi. I see no reasons to upset the findings of the lower court and I hold, therefore, that the appeal lacks substance. I would also dismiss it and it is hereby dismissed. The conviction and sentence are hereby re-affirmed.
SC.60/1981
