S v Madjiedt (CC 26 of 2018) [2022] NAHCMD 55 (16 February 2022)

S v Madjiedt (CC 26 of 2018) [2022] NAHCMD 55 (16 February 2022)

There was no evidence on which a court may convict for count 3 and its alternative charge as well as count 8; however, there was prima facie evidence for counts 2, 4, 5, and 6, so the application for discharge is refused for those counts.

Citation
[2022] NAHCMD 55
Parties
Applicant: Andre Madjiedt; Respondent: The State
Court
High Court Main Division
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
16 February 2022
Case Number
CC 26 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Discharge at End of State’s Case (s 174 Cpa)
Outcome
Application for discharge granted in part, refused in part
Legal Topics
Discharge at Close of Prosecution Case, Rape, Trafficking in Persons, Assault by Threat
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Discharge at Close of Prosecution Case Rape Trafficking in Persons Assault by Threat

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andre Madjiedt

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Discharge at End of State’s Case (s 174 Cpa)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is prima facie evidence on which a court may convict for each count at the close of the State's case
  2. 2 Whether the elements of trafficking and assault by threat are met on the evidence presented

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence on which a court may convict for count 3 and its alternative charge as well as count 8; however, there was prima facie evidence for counts 2, 4, 5, and 6, so the application for discharge is refused for those counts.

Court Disposition

Application for discharge granted in part, refused in part

Orders

  • Application for discharge in terms of s 174 of the CPA is granted in respect of count 3 and its alternative charge as well as count 8.
  • Application for discharge in terms of s 174 of the CPA is refused in respect of counts 2, 4, 5 and 6.