YUSUF v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

SUMMARY OF FACTS
Based on a charge dated 8th August, 2014, the Appellant herein (the 2nd Accused person at the trial Court) and one Alhaji Mohammed Arzika Dakingari (as the 1st Accused person at the trial Court). Both of them were arraigned before the High Court of Kebbi State sitting in Birnin Kebbi on a 20 counts charge for offences relating to fraud, contrary to Section 8(a) of the Advance Fee and Other Fraud Related Offences Act.
On May 20, 2016, the trial Court found the Appellant guilty on the 1st and 2nd counts of the charges and sentenced him to six months imprisonment.
Dissatisfied by the Judgment of the trial Court, Appellant lodged an appeal at the Court of Appeal in Sokoto Division. The Respondent, also expressed his dissatisfaction with the judgment of the trial Court, particularly the six month imprisonment, filed a Cross Appeal in the same Court.
On 8th December, 2016, the Court below affirmed the conviction of the Appellant and reviewed the sentence from six months imprisonment to seven year imprisonment for the offences for which he was charged under Section 8(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act still dissatisfied, the Appellant preceded to this Court to lodge this appeal.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
The Appellant formulated four (4) issues for determination at page 3 of its Appellant’s Brief filed on 10th March, 2017.
1. Was the Court below right in law when it affirmed the conviction of the Appellant for the offence of Criminal Conspiracy contrary Section 8(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act and punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act the appellant’s co-accused having been discharged in relation to the same offence? (This is decoded from ground 2 of the grounds of appeal)
2. Was the Court below right in law when it affirmed the conviction of the Appellant for the offence of aiding contrary Section 8(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act and Punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act, the appellant’s co-accused having been discharged in relation to the same offence? (This is decoded from ground 3 of the grounds of appeal)
3. Did the Court below not impute its personal evidence in the consideration of the appeal before it? (This is decoded from ground 4 of the grounds of appeal).
4. Was the Court below on the totality of the evidence adduced on the records justified in affirming the conviction of the appellant for the offences of criminal conspiracy and aiding contrary Section 8(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act and punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act. (This is decoded from ground 1, 5 & 6 of the grounds of appeal).”
The Respondent however, formulated three (3) issues at pages 2-3 of the Respondent brief.
ISSUE ONE
Whether the Court of Appeal was right when it affirmed the conviction of the Appellant for conspiracy to obtain property by false pretence under Section 8(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act even though it discharged and acquitted the co-accused Alhaji Mohammed Arzika Dakingari who was charged together with the Appellant in the same count one of the charge for the same offence. (Distilled from ground 2 of the Grounds of Appeal).
ISSUE TWO
Whether the Court of Appeal was right when it affirmed the conviction of the Appellant for aiding the obtained of property by false pretence under Section 8(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Acteven though it discharged and acquitted the co-accused Alhaji Mohammed Arzika Dakingari who was charged together the Appellant in the same count two of the charge for the same offence. (Distilled from ground 3 of the Grounds of Appeal).
ISSUE THREE
Whether the Court of Appeal was right when it affirmed the conviction of the Appellant for conspiracy to obtain property by

…………………….B…………………….