Faku v S (A325/2013) [2014] ZAGPJHC 332 (20 March 2014)

Faku v S (A325/2013) [2014] ZAGPJHC 332 (20 March 2014)

The court held that the trial court did not commit any misdirection in sentencing the appellant to 10 years imprisonment for attempted murder. Although the prescribed minimum sentence applies where a firearm is used, the court found that a knife is equally lethal and the appellant's conduct was brutal and directed at a defenceless woman. The appellant is a repeat offender who had previously received non-custodial sentences, which failed to rehabilitate him. The trial court properly considered his personal circumstances and found nothing to warrant a lighter sentence. The appellate court was not convinced that the trial court exercised its discretion unreasonably and therefore dismissed...

Citation
[2014] ZAGPJHC 332
Parties
Appellant: Moses Faku; Respondent: The State
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 March 2014
Case Number
A325/2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence From Regional Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; sentence of 10 years imprisonment confirmed.
Judges
MAKUME, MABUSE
Legal Topics
Attempted Murder, Minimum Sentencing, Repeat Offender, Dangerous Weapon, Rehabilitation, Appeal on Sentence
Criminal Law Attempted Murder Minimum Sentencing Repeat Offender Dangerous Weapon Rehabilitation Appeal on Sentence

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

Parties

Moses Faku

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence From Regional Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of 10 years imprisonment for attempted murder was disproportionate to the crime committed.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court erred in considering the appellant's personal circumstances and prospects of rehabilitation.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court exercised its sentencing discretion reasonably and without misdirection.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the trial court did not commit any misdirection in sentencing the appellant to 10 years imprisonment for attempted murder. Although the prescribed minimum sentence applies where a firearm is used, the court found that a knife is equally lethal and the appellant's conduct was brutal and directed at a defenceless woman. The appellant is a repeat offender who had previously received non-custodial sentences, which failed to rehabilitate him. The trial court properly considered his personal circumstances and found nothing to warrant a lighter sentence. The appellate court was not convinced that the trial court exercised its discretion unreasonably and therefore dismissed...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; sentence of 10 years imprisonment confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal against sentence is dismissed.
  • The sentence of 10 years imprisonment imposed by the Regional Court is confirmed.