Emmanuel v S (A84/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 76 (31 January 2025)

Emmanuel v S (A84/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 76 (31 January 2025)

The court found that the trial court correctly assessed the evidence of Xolani, the section 204 witness, in conjunction with corroborating testimony from Mr Mdeni and Nosipho. The appellant's alibi was not supported by cell phone records or independent witnesses, and his conduct regarding the Audi vehicle suggested an attempt to avoid forensic examination. The requirements for common purpose were met, as the appellant was present at the scene and participated in the murder. The trial court did not err in finding no substantial and compelling circumstances to justify a deviation from the prescribed sentence of life imprisonment, given the premeditated nature of the crime and its...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 76
Parties
Appellant: Mhlongo Thembinkosi Emmanuel; Respondent: The State
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 January 2025
Case Number
A84/2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against both conviction and sentence dismissed.
Judges
Ismail, Yacoob, Strydom
Legal Topics
Murder, Accomplice Evidence, Common Purpose, Alibi, Sentencing Guidelines, Gender Based Violence
Criminal Law Murder Accomplice Evidence Common Purpose Alibi Sentencing Guidelines Gender Based Violence

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mhlongo Thembinkosi Emmanuel

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant of murder and defeating the ends of justice.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence of the section 204 witness, Xolani, was sufficiently corroborated to sustain a conviction.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's alibi was reasonably possibly true.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial court correctly assessed the evidence of Xolani, the section 204 witness, in conjunction with corroborating testimony from Mr Mdeni and Nosipho. The appellant's alibi was not supported by cell phone records or independent witnesses, and his conduct regarding the Audi vehicle suggested an attempt to avoid forensic examination. The requirements for common purpose were met, as the appellant was present at the scene and participated in the murder. The trial court did not err in finding no substantial and compelling circumstances to justify a deviation from the prescribed sentence of life imprisonment, given the premeditated nature of the crime and its...

Court Disposition

Appeal against both conviction and sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal against both the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant is dismissed.