Mokgotlo and Another v S ( Application for Leave to Appeal) (SS48/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 93 (7 February 2025)

Mokgotlo and Another v S ( Application for Leave to Appeal) (SS48/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 93 (7 February 2025)

The court considered the grounds for appeal advanced by the applicants, which alleged factual and legal misdirections. Upon review of the trial record, the judgment, and the arguments presented, the court found that the applicants had not raised any defence at trial and relied on bare denials. The versions presented by the accused were mutually contradictory and irreconcilable, while the State's case was based on circumstantial evidence. The court concluded that the State's version was more probable and provided comprehensive reasons for both conviction and sentence, supported by binding authority. The court was not persuaded that any of the alleged misdirections constituted a reasonable...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 93
Parties
Applicant: Makgotlo, Sophy Refilwe; Applicant: Rihlampfu, Julia; Respondent: The State
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 February 2025
Case Number
SS48/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Conviction and Sentencing
Outcome
Applications for leave to appeal by both applicants are dismissed. Condonation for late filing is granted to the second applicant.
Judges
W J Britz
Legal Topics
Murder, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Attempted Theft, Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Common Purpose
Criminal Law Murder Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Attempted Theft Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospect of Success Common Purpose

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Makgotlo, Sophy Refilwe

Applicant

Rihlampfu, Julia

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Conviction and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated a reasonable prospect of success on appeal against their convictions and sentences.
  2. 2 Whether there were misdirections by the trial court on factual and legal findings.
  3. 3 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the second applicant's application for leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court considered the grounds for appeal advanced by the applicants, which alleged factual and legal misdirections. Upon review of the trial record, the judgment, and the arguments presented, the court found that the applicants had not raised any defence at trial and relied on bare denials. The versions presented by the accused were mutually contradictory and irreconcilable, while the State's case was based on circumstantial evidence. The court concluded that the State's version was more probable and provided comprehensive reasons for both conviction and sentence, supported by binding authority. The court was not persuaded that any of the alleged misdirections constituted a reasonable...

Court Disposition

Applications for leave to appeal by both applicants are dismissed. Condonation for late filing is granted to the second applicant.

Orders

  • Condonation is granted to the second applicant for the late noting of her application for leave to appeal.
  • The applications for leave to appeal in respect of both applicants are dismissed.