Ratio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio Decidendi



AMAYO
V.
THE STATE

(2001) JELR 44345 (SC)    

Supreme Court  ·  SC.241/2000 ·  13 Dec 2001 ·  Nigeria
 · 
Other Citations
Amayo v. State (2001) 18 NWLR (Pt.745)251 (2001) 12 S.C (Pt.1) 1
CORAM
ADOLPHUS GODWIN KARIBI-WHYTE JSC MICHAEL EKUNDAYO OGUNDARE JSC SYLVESTER UMARU ONU JSC SAMSON ODEMWINGIE UWAIFO JSC AKINTOLA OLUFEMI EJIWUNMI JSC

Ratio Decidendi

Core Terms Beta
appellant
evidence
learned trial judge
case
criminal code
p.w.1
reasonable doubt
trial court
present case
court of appeal
criminal responsibility
julius duru
laws of eastern nigeria
identification of the corpse
injured person
dangerous act
deceased woman
facts of this case
karibi-whyte jsc
leading judgment
sentence of death
state of mental unconsciousness
unlawful homicide
3rd p.w.
5th prosecution witnesses
accepted principle of law
accused person
alleged offence
commercial vehicle
concluding part of his judgment
crucial portions of the evidence of this witness
entire medical evidence
following circumstances
guilt of the appellant
high court of imo state
humble view
known causes
lord denning
matter of ordinary factual evidence
necessary inference
negligent acts
requisite mental state of voluntariness
said shittu
scientific evidence
second arm of section
second arm of the said section
virtue of the provisions of section
way findings of fact


UWAIFO, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): This is an appeal against a conviction for murder and sentence of death. The appellant, a police constable, was charged with the murder of one Julius Duru under section 316 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 30, Laws of Eastern Nigeria, 1963, erroneously stated as section 319(1). The alleged offence took place on 22 October, 1987 at Avu junction, Port Harcourt/Owerri road. He was tried in the High Court of Imo State presided over by Ubah, J. On 26 November, 1991, the learned trial judge in the concluding part of his judgment held:

"The testimonies of the 3rd, the 1st and 5th prosecution witnesses offer ample, and satisfactory proof of the ingredients of the offence of murder. In my humble view, the prosecution has proved the charge beyond reasonable doubt."

Earlier, he regarded the 3rd P.W as the only eye-witness relied on by the prosecution. He accordingly found the appellant guilty of the offence of murder and convicted him. He then sentence…

There's more. Sign in to continue reading.

judy.legal is the comprehensive database of case law and legislation from Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria. Gain seamless access to over 20,000 cases, recent judgments, statutes, and rules of court.

Get started   Login