Memani v State (A576/16) [2018] ZAGPPHC 717 (13 April 2018)

Memani v State (A576/16) [2018] ZAGPPHC 717 (13 April 2018)

The court found that the evidence of Mr. Makganya regarding the speed and intoxication of the appellant was not corroborated by expert testimony or physical evidence, and the State failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant negligently caused the death of the deceased or drove under the influence of alcohol. The charge of corruption was also not proven beyond reasonable doubt, as the appellant's version regarding bail money was reasonably possibly true. However, the appellant failed to produce a valid driver's licence at any stage, and the State succeeded in proving this charge beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal therefore partially succeeded, with convictions and...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 717
Parties
Appellant: Memani Vusi Phillip; Respondent: The State
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 April 2018
Case Number
A576/16
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal partially succeeds; convictions and sentences on counts of culpable homicide, driving under the influence, and corruption are set aside. Conviction and sentence for driving without a valid driver's licence are upheld.
Judges
V.T MTATI, T. MAUMELA
Legal Topics
Culpable Homicide, Driving Under Influence, Corruption, Driving Without Licence
Criminal Law Culpable Homicide Driving Under Influence Corruption Driving Without Licence

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Memani Vusi Phillip

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant negligently caused the death of the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant drove the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant gave a benefit to the police to avoid arrest.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the evidence of Mr. Makganya regarding the speed and intoxication of the appellant was not corroborated by expert testimony or physical evidence, and the State failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant negligently caused the death of the deceased or drove under the influence of alcohol. The charge of corruption was also not proven beyond reasonable doubt, as the appellant's version regarding bail money was reasonably possibly true. However, the appellant failed to produce a valid driver's licence at any stage, and the State succeeded in proving this charge beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal therefore partially succeeded, with convictions and...

Court Disposition

Appeal partially succeeds; convictions and sentences on counts of culpable homicide, driving under the influence, and corruption are set aside. Conviction and sentence for driving without a valid driver's licence are upheld.

Orders

  • On the count of culpable homicide the accused is found not guilty and discharged.
  • On the count of driving under the influence of alcohol the accused is found not guilty and discharged.