Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
May 27, 2020 8:25 am
"The trial court did not consider this aspect because the Appellant was found guilty of the principal offence. The offence of murder and elements the prosecution must, as a matter of duty must be establish, see Okoro Vs. The State (2018) LPELR-444272(CA) where my learned brother Mbaba, JCA restated thus:
"The legal ingredients of offence of murder are well known; that to establish the offence of murder, there must be evidence of death (of the deceased); that the death of the deceased resulted from the act/omission of the accused person(s), and that the said act/omission of the accused person intended the death of the deceased, or to cause him grievous bodily harm; that is, the accused did the act/omission, intentionally, with the knowledge that death or grievous bodily harm would be its probable consequence. See Omotola Vs. The State (2009) 7 NWLR (PT.1139) 148; (2009) LPELR - 2663 SC; Ndukwe Vs. The State (2009) 37 NSCQR 425 at 459 - 460; Nwachukwu Vs The State (2002) 3 FWLR (PT.123) 321; Obasi Vs. The State (2014) LPELR - 24013 (CA); Sule Vs. State (2009) 19 NWLR (PT.1169) 33; Akpa Vs. State (2008) 14 NWLR (PT.1106) 72; Musa Vs The State (2014) 1 LPELR - 22912 (CA)."
--PER Y. B. NIMPAR, J.C.A IN CPL ENOBONG UDO VS THE STATE
suit no:CA/C/36C/2019
Legalpedia Electronic Citation: (2020) Legalpedia (CA) 19885
