P. C. O. Oludamilola V The State (2010)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

O. OGEBE J.S.C

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal Abuja which dismissed the appellant’s appeal from his conviction and sentence to death by Otta J of Kogi State High Court of culpable homicide punishable with death contrary to Section 221(a) of the Penal Code by causing the death of one Solomon Omopariola. The case for the prosecution was that the appellant, a Police Officer shot with a revolver pistol at the deceased who had gone to a police station in sympathy with an arrested person. There was evidence that prior to this incident, the appellant and another colleague had been drinking illicit gin PW2 Samuel Olowu was an eye witness to the event. He gave evidence of how the appellant gripped the deceased and was taking him into the Police Station at Efo-Amuro when he heard the sound of a gun shot and the deceased shouted that the appellant had killed him. He went and saw the deceased in a pool of blood and asked the appellant to look for a vehicle to convey the deceased to the hospital. PW2 was a retired inspector of Police and gave a graphic account of what happened in his presence.

The appellant testified on his own behalf that the shot from the pistol was an accidental discharge when the deceased and others were beating him and tried to snatch the pistol from him.

The trial court disbelieved him and found the case of the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt. His appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed and that court confirmed the finding of the trial court that the appellant shot the deceased to death. The appellant has further appealed to this Court and the learned counsel for him filed a brief on his behalf and raised 2 issues for determination as follows:

“I. Whether the case against the appellant was proved as required by the law. (Ground 1 of the notice and grounds of appeal.)

ii. Whether the defence of accident was available to the appellant in this case. (Ground 3 of the notice and grounds of appeal)”

The learned counsel for the respondent also filed a brief of and identified 2 issues for determination as follows:-

“(a) Whether the case against the appellant was proved as required by the law.

(b) Whether the defence of accident was available to the appellant in this case.”

The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there is on evidence that the gun shot was fired intentionally by the appellant with the knowledge that death of grievous bodily harm would be the probable consequence. He argued that if both lower courts had properly evaluated the evidence they would have found that the shot was an accidental discharge and the defence of accident was clearly made out.

In reply the learned counsel for the respondent submitted on the 2 issues raised by him that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the defence of the accident did not avail the appellant.

This case turns entirely on facts and the critical question is whether or not the gun shot which killed the deceased was fired intentionally by the appellant or it was an accidental discharge. The trial court believed the evidence of PW2 a former inspector of Police who was a witness to the event and who was not seriously challenged under cross-examination. The Court of Appeal confirmed the finding of the trial court that the appellant intentionally shot the deceased at close range.It is not the duty of this court to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact made by the trial court and the Court of Appeal unless such findings are perverse or are not supported by the evidence or as a result of a wrong application of any principle of substantive law or procedure resulting in miscarriage of justice. See the case of Albert Afegbai v. Attorney-General of Edo State & Anor. (2001) 14 NWLR (Pt.733) 425.

I see no cause whatsoever to disturb the findings of fact made by the 2 lower courts. The appellant, who was employed as a Police Officer to protect the lives of fellow citizens and maintain peace in the society, abused his authority and snuffed the life out of an innocent citizen. He was rightly convicted by the two courts.

Accordingly, I see no merit in this appeal and I hereby dismiss the appeal and affirm the appellant’s conviction and sentence to death as passed by the two lower courts.

SC.317/2008