Mokoena v S (25/2019) [2024] ZAFSHC 26 (1 February 2024)
- Citation
- [2024] ZAFSHC 26
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
- Panel
- Mhlambi
- Case number
- 25/2019
More details
- Court
- Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
- Panel
- Mhlambi
- Case number
- 25/2019
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the applicant had provided sufficient grounds for condonation of the late filing of the application for leave to appeal. Furthermore, the applicant clarified that the appeal was limited to sentence only, having abandoned the appeal against conviction. Upon consideration of the applications and the submissions made, the court was satisfied that both condonation and leave to appeal against sentence should be granted, as there was a reasonable prospect that another court may arrive at a different conclusion regarding sentence.
Court disposition
Condonation for late filing is granted. Leave to appeal against sentence to the Full Court is granted.
Orders
- Condonation is granted for the late service and filing of this application.
- Leave to appeal against sentence to the Full Court of this Division is granted.
02
Material facts
Parties
Fusi Hamilton Mokoena
Applicant Counsel: Mr. P PeyperThe State
Respondent Counsel: Adv. Pienaar03
Procedural history
Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal.
- 02
Whether leave to appeal against sentence should be granted to the Full Court.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant requested condonation for the late filing of the application and sought leave to appeal against sentence only, abandoning the appeal against conviction. The heads of argument and correspondence clarified the scope of the application.
- Respondent
- The respondent did not oppose the granting of condonation or leave to appeal against sentence, and no substantive counter-argument was advanced.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
S v Mathebula 2012 (1) SACR 374 (SCA)
Condonation may be granted where the applicant provides a reasonable explanation for the delay and prospects of success exist.
- 02
S v Smith 2012 (1) SACR 567 (SCA)
Leave to appeal against sentence should be granted if there is a reasonable prospect that another court may impose a different sentence.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the applicant had provided sufficient grounds for condonation of the late filing of the application for leave to appeal. Furthermore, the applicant clarified that the appeal was limited to sentence only, having abandoned the appeal against conviction. Upon consideration of the applications and the submissions made, the court was satisfied that both condonation and leave to appeal against sentence should be granted, as there was a reasonable prospect that another court may arrive at a different conclusion regarding sentence.
Court disposition
Condonation for late filing is granted. Leave to appeal against sentence to the Full Court is granted.
- Condonation is granted for the late service and filing of this application.
- Leave to appeal against sentence to the Full Court of this Division is granted.
Source and reliance status
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN
Case number: 25/2019
In the matter between:
FUSI
HAMILTON MOKOENA
Applicant
and
THE STATE
Respondent
JUDGMENT BY:
MHLAMBI J,
DELIVERED ON:
01 FEBRUARY 2024
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE
TO APPEAL
[1] In this application, the applicant sought an order that condonation be granted for the late service and filing of this application and founding affidavit as well as that leave to appeal against the applicant’s conviction and sentence be granted to the full bench of this court.
[2] In his heads of argument and subsequent correspondence, the applicant indicated that he wished to proceed with the application for leave to appeal against sentence only. He therefore abandoned the leave to appeal against the conviction.
[3] I have read both the applications for condonation and leave to appeal and I am satisfied that both should be granted.
[4] Consequently, I make the following order.
Order:
1. Condonation is granted for the late service and filing of the late filing of this application;
2. Leave to appeal against sentence to the Full Court of this Division is granted.
____
MHLAMBI, J
Counsel for the applicant: Mr. P Peyper
Instructed by:
Payper & Botha Attorney Inc.
39C First Avenue
Westdene
Bloemfontein
Counsel for the respondent: Adv. Pienaar
Instructed by:
Director of Public Prosecutions
Waterfall Building
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.