Prevost v S (Appeal) (SS 19/2015) [2025] ZAGPJHC 360 (28 March 2025)

Prevost v S (Appeal) (SS 19/2015) [2025] ZAGPJHC 360 (28 March 2025)

The court found that the appellant was the originator of the plan to rob and murder the deceased, actively participated in all stages of the crime, and never dissociated herself from her co-accused. The evidence demonstrated a prior agreement and common purpose, with the appellant present and involved during the planning, execution, and aftermath of the murder. The appellant's argument of lack of criminal capacity due to drug use was unsupported by evidence and not raised during trial or in her application for leave to appeal. The court held that the murder was premeditated and planned, as evidenced by the detailed preparations and coordinated actions of the appellant and her co-accused....

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 360
Parties
Appellant: Candice Prevost; Respondent: The State
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 March 2025
Case Number
SS 19/2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction of Murder
Outcome
Appeal against conviction of murder dismissed.
Judges
Mdalana-Mayisela, Dosio, Moosa
Legal Topics
Common Purpose, Criminal Capacity, Premeditated Murder, Circumstantial Evidence, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Common Purpose Criminal Capacity Premeditated Murder Circumstantial Evidence Appeal Procedure

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Candice Prevost

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction of Murder

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant and her co-accused acted in furtherance of a prior agreement or common purpose to commit murder.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant lacked criminal capacity due to non-pathological causes at the relevant time.
  3. 3 Whether the murder of the deceased was premeditated or planned.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant was the originator of the plan to rob and murder the deceased, actively participated in all stages of the crime, and never dissociated herself from her co-accused. The evidence demonstrated a prior agreement and common purpose, with the appellant present and involved during the planning, execution, and aftermath of the murder. The appellant's argument of lack of criminal capacity due to drug use was unsupported by evidence and not raised during trial or in her application for leave to appeal. The court held that the murder was premeditated and planned, as evidenced by the detailed preparations and coordinated actions of the appellant and her co-accused....

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction of murder dismissed.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the appellant’s heads of argument is granted.
  • The appeal against the conviction of murder is dismissed.