R v Mohapi and Another (CRI/A/40-41/85) [1986] LSCA 17 (14 March 1986)

R v Mohapi and Another (CRI/A/40-41/85) [1986] LSCA 17 (14 March 1986)

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants stole nineteen bags of maize, as there was insufficient evidence that all nineteen bags were present when the appellants arrived at the scene.

Citation
[1986] LSCA 17
Parties
Appellant: Simon Mohapi; Appellant: Phakalitha Mpopo; Respondent: Rex
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
14 March 1986
Case Number
CRI/A/40-41/85
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside
Legal Topics
Theft, Standard of Proof, Evidence Assessment
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Theft Standard of Proof Evidence Assessment

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Mohapi

Appellant

Phakalitha Mpopo

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants unlawfully and intentionally stole nineteen bags of maize
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants stole nineteen bags of maize, as there was insufficient evidence that all nineteen bags were present when the appellants arrived at the scene.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside

Orders

  • The appellants are acquitted.
  • The appeal fee must be refunded to the appellants.