Moamogoe v S (191/2019) [2020] ZASCA 106; 2021 (1) SACR 121 (SCA) (18 September 2020)

Moamogoe v S (191/2019) [2020] ZASCA 106; 2021 (1) SACR 121 (SCA) (18 September 2020)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the terms of the plea and sentence agreement were clear and had been confirmed by the appellant before the trial judge. The appellant's subsequent claim that the agreement did not accurately reflect the verbal negotiations was extraneous to the record and could not be entertained on appeal. The proper procedure for challenging the accuracy of the plea agreement was by way of a review application, where allegations could be made on affidavit and responded to under oath. The court was bound by the record and, in the absence of an application to adduce further evidence, could not consider matters outside the record. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2020] ZASCA 106
Parties
Appellant: Ofentse Lofentse Moamogoe; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 September 2020
Case Number
191/2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence Imposed in Terms of a Plea and Sentence Agreement
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Judges
Saldulker, Mbha, Van Der Merwe, Schippers, Mabindla-Boqwana
Legal Topics
Plea and Sentence Agreement, Appeal Vs Review, Section 105a Criminal Procedure Act, Sentence Concurrency
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Plea and Sentence Agreement Appeal Vs Review Section 105a Criminal Procedure Act Sentence Concurrency

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ofentse Lofentse Moamogoe

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence Imposed in Terms of a Plea and Sentence Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plea and sentence agreement correctly reflected what had been agreed between the appellant and the State.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's challenge to the sentence imposed in terms of the plea agreement can be entertained on appeal or only by way of review.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the terms of the plea and sentence agreement were clear and had been confirmed by the appellant before the trial judge. The appellant's subsequent claim that the agreement did not accurately reflect the verbal negotiations was extraneous to the record and could not be entertained on appeal. The proper procedure for challenging the accuracy of the plea agreement was by way of a review application, where allegations could be made on affidavit and responded to under oath. The court was bound by the record and, in the absence of an application to adduce further evidence, could not consider matters outside the record. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.