Kekana v S (37/2018) [2018] ZASCA 148; 2019 (1) SACR 1 (SCA); [2019] 1 All SA 67 (SCA) (31 October 2018)

Kekana v S (37/2018) [2018] ZASCA 148; 2019 (1) SACR 1 (SCA); [2019] 1 All SA 67 (SCA) (31 October 2018)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in considering itself precluded from imposing life imprisonment solely because the appellant pleaded guilty 'in terms of s 51(2)' of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The court clarified that sentencing discretion remains with the trial court, which must consider all relevant facts, including whether the murders were premeditated. The appellant failed to lay a factual foundation to justify the application of s 51(2) over s 51(1). The facts established that the murders were premeditated, as the appellant acted with deliberation and intent, killing his four children in succession and causing his wife to listen to the killing of one...

Citation
[2018] ZASCA 148
Parties
Appellant: Lesiba Simon Kekana; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 October 2018
Case Number
37/2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Life imprisonment imposed on each murder count; sentences on counts 2, 3, 4, and 5 to run concurrently with count 1.
Judges
Shongwe, Majiedt, Van der Merwe, Molemela, Makgoka
Legal Topics
Premeditated Murder, Minimum Sentencing, Sentencing Discretion, Aggravating Circumstances, Life Imprisonment, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Premeditated Murder Minimum Sentencing Sentencing Discretion Aggravating Circumstances Life Imprisonment Appeal Procedure

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lesiba Simon Kekana

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in imposing sentences of 20 years' imprisonment on each murder count instead of the prescribed minimum sentence.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court was precluded from considering life imprisonment due to the appellant's plea in terms of s 51(2) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act.
  3. 3 Whether the murders were premeditated, justifying the application of s 51(1) and life imprisonment.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in considering itself precluded from imposing life imprisonment solely because the appellant pleaded guilty 'in terms of s 51(2)' of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The court clarified that sentencing discretion remains with the trial court, which must consider all relevant facts, including whether the murders were premeditated. The appellant failed to lay a factual foundation to justify the application of s 51(2) over s 51(1). The facts established that the murders were premeditated, as the appellant acted with deliberation and intent, killing his four children in succession and causing his wife to listen to the killing of one...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Life imprisonment imposed on each murder count; sentences on counts 2, 3, 4, and 5 to run concurrently with count 1.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed, subject to the substituted order.
  • The sentences imposed by the trial court on counts 1, 2, 3, and 4 are set aside and substituted with sentences of life imprisonment on each count. The sentence imposed on count 5 stands.