Makamu v S (A145/2019) [2020] ZAGPJHC 54 (26 February 2020)

Makamu v S (A145/2019) [2020] ZAGPJHC 54 (26 February 2020)

The appeal court found that the trial court misdirected itself by imposing consecutive sentences for two attempted murder convictions that arose from a single incident involving the same parties and location. The offences were inextricably linked in time and place, and the cumulative effect of the sentences was disproportionate to the criminal conduct and circumstances. The trial court failed to adequately consider the totality of the facts, including the role of alcohol and the conduct of the complainants, as well as the appellant's personal circumstances and period of pre-sentencing detention. The effective sentence of ten years was deemed harsh and inappropriate, and the appeal court...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPJHC 54
Parties
Appellant: Makamu Thabang; Respondent: The State
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 February 2020
Case Number
A145/2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld; sentences set aside and substituted with concurrent sentences.
Judges
Molahlehi, Manoim
Legal Topics
Sentencing Principles, Concurrent Sentences, Judicial Discretion, Personal Circumstances, Awaiting Trial Detention
Criminal Law Sentencing Principles Concurrent Sentences Judicial Discretion Personal Circumstances Awaiting Trial Detention

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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Makamu Thabang

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court properly exercised its discretion in imposing consecutive sentences for two convictions of attempted murder.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court failed to consider the appellant's personal circumstances and the period of detention awaiting trial.
  3. 3 Whether the sentences should have been ordered to run concurrently given the circumstances of the offences.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal court found that the trial court misdirected itself by imposing consecutive sentences for two attempted murder convictions that arose from a single incident involving the same parties and location. The offences were inextricably linked in time and place, and the cumulative effect of the sentences was disproportionate to the criminal conduct and circumstances. The trial court failed to adequately consider the totality of the facts, including the role of alcohol and the conduct of the complainants, as well as the appellant's personal circumstances and period of pre-sentencing detention. The effective sentence of ten years was deemed harsh and inappropriate, and the appeal court...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; sentences set aside and substituted with concurrent sentences.

Orders

  • The sentences imposed on 26 August 2017 by the Magistrate Court for the District of Johannesburg Central held at Orlando are set aside and substituted with five years imprisonment for each count of attempted murder.
  • The sentences for counts 1 and 2 shall run concurrently.