Radebe v S (A259/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1084 (10 September 2019)

Radebe v S (A259/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1084 (10 September 2019)

The court found that the appellant was correctly convicted of attempted murder on the basis of common purpose, even though the charge sheet did not expressly mention common purpose. The evidence established that the appellant and his co-perpetrator acted in concert during the commission of the robbery and attempted murder, and the appellant was identified by multiple witnesses. The court held that dolus eventualis was proven beyond reasonable doubt, as the appellant foresaw and reconciled himself with the possibility of a person being shot during the robbery. The sentence imposed was found to be appropriate given the seriousness of the offences, the appellant's personal circumstances, and...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 1084
Parties
Appellant: Bafana Stanley Radebe; Respondent: The State
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 September 2019
Case Number
A259/2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence on Count 2 (attempted Murder)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence on Count 2 confirmed.
Judges
Neukircher, Mkhawane
Legal Topics
Common Purpose, Attempted Murder, Sentencing Principles, Identification Evidence, Dolus Eventualis
Criminal Law Common Purpose Attempted Murder Sentencing Principles Identification Evidence Dolus Eventualis

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

Parties

Bafana Stanley Radebe

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence on Count 2 (attempted Murder)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was correctly convicted of attempted murder on the basis of common purpose despite the charge sheet not expressly averring common purpose.
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed for attempted murder was appropriate and whether the sentences should have been ordered to run concurrently.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant was correctly convicted of attempted murder on the basis of common purpose, even though the charge sheet did not expressly mention common purpose. The evidence established that the appellant and his co-perpetrator acted in concert during the commission of the robbery and attempted murder, and the appellant was identified by multiple witnesses. The court held that dolus eventualis was proven beyond reasonable doubt, as the appellant foresaw and reconciled himself with the possibility of a person being shot during the robbery. The sentence imposed was found to be appropriate given the seriousness of the offences, the appellant's personal circumstances, and...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence on Count 2 confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal in respect of conviction and sentence on Count 2 is dismissed.