Khalaki and Another v S (A177/14) [2015] ZAFSHC 2 (22 January 2015)

Khalaki and Another v S (A177/14) [2015] ZAFSHC 2 (22 January 2015)

The court found that the second appellant's conduct before and after his release from custody demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that he knew he was not lawfully released and possessed the requisite criminal intent to escape from lawful custody. The trial magistrate did not materially misdirect himself regarding conviction. However, the trial court erred in applying the repealed section 48(2) of the Correctional Services Act 8 of 1959, believing that the sentence for escaping from custody could not run concurrently with the sentence for murder. The current Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998 does not prohibit concurrent sentences. The misdirection justified appellate interference, and...

Citation
[2015] ZAFSHC 2
Parties
Appellant: Phallang Moses Khalaki; Appellant: Quewin Francois Coetzee; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 January 2015
Case Number
A177/14
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From District Court
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence upheld.
Judges
Rampai, Tsatsi
Legal Topics
Escape From Custody, Mens Rea, Correctional Services Act, Concurrent Sentences
Criminal Law Escape From Custody Mens Rea Correctional Services Act Concurrent Sentences

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phallang Moses Khalaki

Appellant

Quewin Francois Coetzee

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second appellant knew he was not lawfully granted bail and thus possessed the requisite mens rea for the offence of escaping from custody.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court erred in directing that the sentence for escaping from custody should not run concurrently with the sentence for murder.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the second appellant's conduct before and after his release from custody demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that he knew he was not lawfully released and possessed the requisite criminal intent to escape from lawful custody. The trial magistrate did not materially misdirect himself regarding conviction. However, the trial court erred in applying the repealed section 48(2) of the Correctional Services Act 8 of 1959, believing that the sentence for escaping from custody could not run concurrently with the sentence for murder. The current Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998 does not prohibit concurrent sentences. The misdirection justified appellate interference, and...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence upheld.

Orders

  • The appeal fails as regards conviction.
  • The conviction is confirmed.