- -- --
-25
who is said to· be at large. It follows that the 1st defendant cannot
be convicted of the offence of conspiracy. In the final analysis, I
find and hold that the evidence adduced by the prosecution as a
whole with the confessional statement which is Exhibit "C" as well
as the evidence of the 1st defendant admitting commission of the
offence of robbery failed to prove the offence of armed robbery
against the 1st defendant beyond reasonable doubt. However, a
lesser offence of robbery stood proved beyond reasonable doubt
against the 1st defendant, and I so hold . It is now settled law that
the Court can convict a defendant of a lesser offence than the one
charged . Thus ,: a conviction for robbery can be substituted for the
offence of armed robbery .
SEE : OGU VS . QUEEN (1963) 2 SCNLR 74.
ST ATE VS . USMAN (2005) 1 NWLR (PT. 906) 80.
Having considered the evidence adduced by the prosecution and
the defendants and found as indicated above, I hold that the sole
issue for determination must be and is hereby resolved in terms of
the findings ; that is, partly in favour of the prosecution and partly
against her. Accordingly , judgment is entered in the following
terms :1.
2.
The prosecution proved a lesser offence of robbery contrary to
section 1( 1) of the Robbery and Firearms Special Provision
Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria , 2004 beyond
reasonable doubt against the 1st defendant and he is found
guilty accordingly.
The prosecution failed to prove the charge relating to
6~ences of conspiracy and armed robbery aga inst
r d~fend~nts b~yond reasonable doubt. The defendants
a ordingly discharged and acquitted in respect of
co spiracy and armed robbery charge .
• 0-~,.
1,-4 ...~ "T ,c.
5
~
'\J
o7
~~ 2117
"'' 1 SH~
LOCUTUS IN RES PECT OF THE
1ST
the
the
are
the
DEFENDANT
Qefendants' counsel - Urges the court to be lenient with the 1st
defen~ant. He is a very young man who in all intents and purposes
can sf1II be useful to the society . He says that he is a first offender
who has many years ahead of him . The 1st defendant has been in