R v Nteso and Another (CRI/A 57 of 83) [1984] LSCA 145 (20 December 1984)
The conviction of accused 1 was upheld as the evidence against him was overwhelming and credible. The conviction of accused 2 was quashed because the only identifying witness was unreliable and the trial court failed to approach his evidence with necessary caution. The sentence for accused 1 was not excessive and was upheld.
- Citation
- [1984] LSCA 145
- Parties
- Appellant: Albert Ntseso; Appellant: Sello Mofokeng; Respondent: Rex
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Lesotho
- Judgment Date
- 20 December 1984
- Case Number
- CRI/A 57 of 83
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal of accused 1 dismissed; appeal of accused 2 allowed
- Legal Topics
- Robbery, Identification Evidence, Appeals, Sentencing
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Albert Ntseso
Appellant
Sello Mofokeng
Appellant
Rex
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction of accused 1 (Albert Ntseso) was supported by credible evidence
- 2 Whether the conviction of accused 2 (Sello Mofokeng) was safe given the nature of the identification evidence
- 3 Whether the sentence imposed on accused 1 was appropriate
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction of accused 1 was upheld as the evidence against him was overwhelming and credible. The conviction of accused 2 was quashed because the only identifying witness was unreliable and the trial court failed to approach his evidence with necessary caution. The sentence for accused 1 was not excessive and was upheld.
Court Disposition
Appeal of accused 1 dismissed; appeal of accused 2 allowed
Orders
- Conviction and sentence of accused 1 (Albert Ntseso) upheld
- Conviction of accused 2 (Sello Mofokeng) quashed and appeal allowed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment