Maphanga v S (607/2017) [2018] ZASCA 120 (20 September 2018)

Maphanga v S (607/2017) [2018] ZASCA 120 (20 September 2018)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances warranting reconsideration or variation of the earlier order dismissing his application for special leave to appeal. The alleged alibi defence was based on the date in the charge sheet (12 March 2011), but the evidence at trial established that the offence occurred in March 2010. The identification parade took place on 1 March 2011, which would not have been possible if the offence had occurred on 12 March 2011. The variance between the charge sheet and the evidence was not material to the conviction and could have been addressed by amendment. The application for reconsideration was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2018] ZASCA 120
Parties
Appellant: Oupa Stanley Maphanga; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 September 2018
Case Number
607/2017
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Reconsideration of Special Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for reconsideration of special leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
Ponnan, Tshiqi, Mbha
Legal Topics
Special Leave to Appeal, Exceptional Circumstances, Alibi Defence, Amendment of Charge Sheet
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Special Leave to Appeal Exceptional Circumstances Alibi Defence Amendment of Charge Sheet

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oupa Stanley Maphanga

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Reconsideration of Special Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to warrant reconsideration or variation of the order dismissing the application for special leave to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's alleged alibi defence constitutes new evidence justifying reconsideration.
  3. 3 Whether the variance between the charge sheet and the evidence regarding the date of the offence affects the conviction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances warranting reconsideration or variation of the earlier order dismissing his application for special leave to appeal. The alleged alibi defence was based on the date in the charge sheet (12 March 2011), but the evidence at trial established that the offence occurred in March 2010. The identification parade took place on 1 March 2011, which would not have been possible if the offence had occurred on 12 March 2011. The variance between the charge sheet and the evidence was not material to the conviction and could have been addressed by amendment. The application for reconsideration was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for reconsideration of special leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application in terms of s 17(2)(f) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 is dismissed.