Mokoena and Others v S (A201/2017) [2019] ZAFSHC 270 (31 May 2019)

Mokoena and Others v S (A201/2017) [2019] ZAFSHC 270 (31 May 2019)

The court found that the evidence against accused 5 was insufficient to support his convictions, as the cell phone records and other circumstantial evidence did not exclude reasonable alternative inferences. Accordingly, his convictions and sentences were set aside. In contrast, the convictions of accused 1 and 6 were supported by reliable identification, direct and circumstantial evidence, and admissions. The trial court's findings regarding their involvement were upheld. The court further held that the order directing a portion of the determinate sentence to run concurrently with the life sentence was incompetent, as the Correctional Services Act prescribes that determinate sentences...

Citation
[2019] ZAFSHC 270
Parties
Appellant: Mohlalefang Cyril Mokoena; Appellant: Lehlohonolo Phillip Moloi; Appellant: Moeketsi Elliot Radebe; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 May 2019
Case Number
A201/2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal of accused 5 upheld; convictions and sentences set aside. Appeals of accused 1 and 6 dismissed; convictions and sentences confirmed. Concurrency order regarding accused 1's sentence set aside.
Judges
Musi, Loubser, Moeng
Legal Topics
Murder, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Attempted Murder, Circumstantial Evidence, Sentencing Principles, Concurrent Sentences
Criminal Law Murder Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Attempted Murder Circumstantial Evidence Sentencing Principles Concurrent Sentences

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohlalefang Cyril Mokoena

Appellant

Lehlohonolo Phillip Moloi

Appellant

Moeketsi Elliot Radebe

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the convictions of the appellants were supported by sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court correctly applied the principles governing circumstantial evidence.
  3. 3 Whether the sentences imposed, including the concurrency order, were lawful and appropriate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the evidence against accused 5 was insufficient to support his convictions, as the cell phone records and other circumstantial evidence did not exclude reasonable alternative inferences. Accordingly, his convictions and sentences were set aside. In contrast, the convictions of accused 1 and 6 were supported by reliable identification, direct and circumstantial evidence, and admissions. The trial court's findings regarding their involvement were upheld. The court further held that the order directing a portion of the determinate sentence to run concurrently with the life sentence was incompetent, as the Correctional Services Act prescribes that determinate sentences...

Court Disposition

Appeal of accused 5 upheld; convictions and sentences set aside. Appeals of accused 1 and 6 dismissed; convictions and sentences confirmed. Concurrency order regarding accused 1's sentence set aside.

Orders

  • The second appellant's (accused 5) appeal against his convictions and sentences is upheld.
  • The second appellant's (accused 5) convictions and sentences are set aside.