Beleme v R (C of A (CRI) 8 of 91) [1994] LSCA 1 (1 January 1994)

Beleme v R (C of A (CRI) 8 of 91) [1994] LSCA 1 (1 January 1994)

The appellant exceeded the bounds of self-defence by firing three shots when a single warning shot would have sufficed; thus, the conviction for murder was not warranted, and the proper conviction is culpable homicide.

Citation
[1994] LSCA 1
Parties
Appellant: Malefetsane Beleme; Respondent: Rex
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
1 January 1994
Case Number
C of A (CRI) 8 of 91
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Murder, Self Defence, Culpable Homicide, Appeal, Sentencing
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Murder Self Defence Culpable Homicide Appeal Sentencing

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malefetsane Beleme

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant unlawfully and intentionally killed the deceased
  2. 2 Whether the appellant acted in self-defence or exceeded its bounds
  3. 3 Whether the conviction should be for murder or culpable homicide

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant exceeded the bounds of self-defence by firing three shots when a single warning shot would have sufficed; thus, the conviction for murder was not warranted, and the proper conviction is culpable homicide.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Conviction for murder and sentence of ten years imprisonment set aside
  • Substituted with conviction for culpable homicide and sentence of three years imprisonment