Mafoho v S (149/2012) [2013] ZASCA 49; 2013 (2) SACR 179 (SCA) (28 March 2013)

Mafoho v S (149/2012) [2013] ZASCA 49; 2013 (2) SACR 179 (SCA) (28 March 2013)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's sentence of 275 years' imprisonment, although excessive, does not require interference because the Parole and Correctional Supervision Amendment Act 87 of 1997 entitles prisoners serving determinate sentences to be considered for parole after serving 25 years, regardless of the length of the sentence. The court found that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to impose life imprisonment at the time, and thus substitution of the sentence was not competent. The appellant's reliance on cases involving prescribed life sentences was misplaced, as his offences did not attract such a sentence. The legislative amendments were intended to...

Citation
[2013] ZASCA 49
Parties
Appellant: Michael Mafoho; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 March 2013
Case Number
149/2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against sentence dismissed.
Judges
Mthiyane, Shongwe, Schoeman, Swain, Mbha
Legal Topics
Parole Eligibility, Correctional Services Act, Minimum Sentences Act, Retrospective Legislation, Cruel Inhuman Punishment
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Parole Eligibility Correctional Services Act Minimum Sentences Act Retrospective Legislation Cruel Inhuman Punishment

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

Parties

Michael Mafoho

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of 275 years' imprisonment imposed on the appellant is appropriate in light of parole legislation.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant is entitled to have his sentence substituted with life imprisonment.
  3. 3 What parole period applies to the appellant's determinate sentence under the relevant statutory regime.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's sentence of 275 years' imprisonment, although excessive, does not require interference because the Parole and Correctional Supervision Amendment Act 87 of 1997 entitles prisoners serving determinate sentences to be considered for parole after serving 25 years, regardless of the length of the sentence. The court found that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to impose life imprisonment at the time, and thus substitution of the sentence was not competent. The appellant's reliance on cases involving prescribed life sentences was misplaced, as his offences did not attract such a sentence. The legislative amendments were intended to...

Court Disposition

Appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal against sentence is dismissed.