Made v S (A81/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 761 (29 July 2024)

Made v S (A81/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 761 (29 July 2024)

The court found that while the trial court correctly considered the seriousness of the offences, it failed to adequately weigh the cumulative effect of the sentences imposed. The effective sentence of 55 years' imprisonment was deemed shockingly disproportionate and too harsh in the circumstances, particularly given the appellant's personal circumstances and lack of previous convictions. The court held that all sentences should run concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of 35 years' imprisonment. The sentence was also antedated to the date originally imposed by the trial court.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 761
Parties
Appellant: Vusi Sidwell Made; Respondent: The State
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 July 2024
Case Number
A81/2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against sentence upheld; sentences to run concurrently; effective sentence reduced to 35 years' imprisonment, antedated to 18 May 2010.
Judges
Basson, Lenayi, Mpshe
Legal Topics
Minimum Sentences, Concurrent Sentences, Sentencing Discretion, Cumulative Effect, Murder, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
Criminal Law Minimum Sentences Concurrent Sentences Sentencing Discretion Cumulative Effect Murder Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vusi Sidwell Made

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cumulative effect of the sentences imposed by the trial court was unduly harsh and disproportionate.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court misdirected itself in failing to order that all sentences run concurrently.
  3. 3 Whether the effective sentence of 55 years' imprisonment induces a sense of shock and warrants interference.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while the trial court correctly considered the seriousness of the offences, it failed to adequately weigh the cumulative effect of the sentences imposed. The effective sentence of 55 years' imprisonment was deemed shockingly disproportionate and too harsh in the circumstances, particularly given the appellant's personal circumstances and lack of previous convictions. The court held that all sentences should run concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of 35 years' imprisonment. The sentence was also antedated to the date originally imposed by the trial court.

Court Disposition

Appeal against sentence upheld; sentences to run concurrently; effective sentence reduced to 35 years' imprisonment, antedated to 18 May 2010.

Orders

  • The sentences imposed in respect of counts 2, 3, and 4 are to run concurrently with the sentence imposed in respect of count 1. The accused is thus sentenced to an effective 35 years' imprisonment.
  • In terms of section 282 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 51 of 1977, the sentence is antedated to 18 May 2010, being the date he was sentenced by the trial court.