Makgisa v S (Appeal) (CA14/2023) [2025] ZANWHC 135 (30 June 2025)

Makgisa v S (Appeal) (CA14/2023) [2025] ZANWHC 135 (30 June 2025)

The appeal court found that the trial court did not err in convicting the appellant of rape. The evidence of the complainant and her cousin was corroborated on material aspects, and the medical report confirmed injuries consistent with sexual assault. The DNA evidence linked the appellant to the crime. The inconsistencies raised by the appellant were immaterial and did not undermine the reliability of the state witnesses. The appellant did not testify to rebut the prosecution's case. The trial court correctly applied the principles governing appeals, giving due deference to its findings of fact and credibility. Regarding sentence, the trial court properly considered the appellant's...

Citation
[2025] ZANWHC 135
Parties
Appellant: Tebogo Bonolo Makgisa; Respondent: The State
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 June 2025
Case Number
CA 14/2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence confirmed.
Judges
Morris, Laubscher
Legal Topics
Rape, Common Purpose, Minimum Sentencing, Credibility of Witnesses, Appeal Principles, Consent in Sexual Offences
Criminal Law Rape Common Purpose Minimum Sentencing Credibility of Witnesses Appeal Principles Consent in Sexual Offences

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

Parties

Tebogo Bonolo Makgisa

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant raped the complainant acting in common purpose with Mosweu.
  2. 2 Whether the conviction was supported by reliable and credible evidence beyond reasonable doubt.
  3. 3 Whether the inconsistencies in state witnesses' testimony were material to the outcome.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal court found that the trial court did not err in convicting the appellant of rape. The evidence of the complainant and her cousin was corroborated on material aspects, and the medical report confirmed injuries consistent with sexual assault. The DNA evidence linked the appellant to the crime. The inconsistencies raised by the appellant were immaterial and did not undermine the reliability of the state witnesses. The appellant did not testify to rebut the prosecution's case. The trial court correctly applied the principles governing appeals, giving due deference to its findings of fact and credibility. Regarding sentence, the trial court properly considered the appellant's...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
  • The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court are confirmed.