3PLR – SUNDAY ALBERT V. THE QUEEN
POLICY, PRACTICE AND PUBLISHING, LAW REPORTS 3PLR
[PDF copy of this judgment can be sent to your email for N300 only. Just order through lawnigeria@gmail.com and info@lawnigeria.com or text 07067102097]
SUNDAY ALBERT
V.
THE QUEEN
FEDERAL SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA
14TH APRIL, 1960.
F.S.C.11/1960
3PLR/1960/23 (SC)
OTHER CITATIONS
BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS
MYLES JOHN ABBOTT, F.J. (Presided)
LIONEL BRETT, F.J. (Read the Judgment of the Court)
PERCIVAL CYRIL HUBBARD, AG. F.J.
MAIN ISSUES
CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Attempted Murder – Need to prove Intent to Kill and not just intent to cause grieous harm – Whether appellate can make a finding of intent to kill from proved facts upon which trial court found intent to cause grievous harm
CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE:- Proof of crime – Rule that proof of intention to cause grievous harm may found a conviction for murder – Whether insufficient to found a conviction for attempted murder
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – APPEAL:- Attempted murder – What must be proved.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant absent and not represented.
A. ADEMOLA – for the Respondent.
MAIN JUDGMENT
BRETT, F.J. (Delivering the Judgment of the Court):
This was an application by Sunday Albert for leave to appeal against his conviction on a charge of attempted murder, contrary to s.320 of the Criminal Code. The evidence amply supported the charge, but the learned Judge, without expressly finding that there was no intent to kill, found that the appellant inflicted a serious wound, with intent to cause grievous harm. The Criminal Code lays down exactly the same rule in this matter as the law of England, namely that on a charge of attempted murder an actual intent to kill must be proved, although if death results an intent to cause grievous harm will be sufficient to sustain a charge of murder: R. v. Whybrow 35 Cr. App. R. 141. There was thus a clear misdirection in law.
We were satisfied, however, after careful consideration, that the facts which the Judge found proved were consistent only with an intent to kill, and that if the Judge had directed himself correctly he must have found that intent proved. We therefore held that no miscarriage of justice had occurred, and we refused leave to appeal.
ABBOTT, F.J.:
I concur.
HUBBARD, AG. F.J.:
I concur.
Application refused.
