demonstrated above that there are corroborative pieces of evidence that have been
laid by the prosecution. Ordinarily, a court can convict an accused on his
confessional statement without more . See Akpan.v.State (1990~7 NWLR
(pt.160)101. I am reluctant to attach much weight or probative value on exhibit Pl
for lack of compliance with Admini:;tration of Criminal Justice Law of Anambra
State, 2010 .
In conclusion and , for reasons I have set out above, I hold that from the totality of
evidence adduced in this case, the prosecution proved the offence of robbery
against the 1st defendant only beyond reasonable doubt. It is settled that the court
can convict an accused person for a lesser offence than the one charged if the
folluwing conditions are met:
a. the elements in the offence charged and those in the lesser offence for which
the accused is convicted are the same
b. the evidence adduced and facts found must be insufficient for the conviction
in respect of the offence charged but must at the same time support the lesser
offence.
See the case of Adoba .v. State, supra @255 . See also Section 287 (2) of ACJL
Anambra State 2010 .
st
In the light of the fore going, I hereby convict the 1 defendant for the offence of
robbery . He is guilty of the offence of robbery only. The prosecution failed to
prove the offence of armed robbery against the defendants beyond reasonable
doubt.
ALLOCUTUS
st
I have listened attentively to the mitigation plea by the 1 defendant' s counsel. I
have taken into consideration that the 1st defendant is a young man and an orphan.
st
The law must take its course. Punishment is a consequence of a crime. The 1
defendant is hereby sentenced to 21 years imprisonment which will run
concurrently starting from the day he was remanded in ; ison custody awaiting his
I
nd
trial. The 2 defendant is hereby discharged and__~ quitt d for l a c k ~
~iJ/2rJ ,
Ho~
~
~ C. ~duedtesi
l,
Appearances;
J.C Emembie, Esq Senior State Counsel, for the Prosecution
S.C. Ugwunna, Esq for the 1st defendant
C.C. Eze, Esq for the 2 nd defendant
.
- ? --
r
28