S v De Kok (186/2012) [2012] ZAFSHC 173 (18 September 2012)

S v De Kok (186/2012) [2012] ZAFSHC 173 (18 September 2012)

The evidence, including the accused's admissions, clearly established that the accused broke into the premises with the intent to steal. Section 262 of the Criminal Procedure Act permits the court to convict on the specific offence proved by the evidence. It is both legally correct and necessary for the conviction to reflect housebreaking with intent to steal, rather than with intent to commit a crime unknown to the state. The conviction is therefore amended accordingly, and the sentence imposed by the magistrate is confirmed.

Citation
[2012] ZAFSHC 173
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Marshall De Kok
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 September 2012
Case Number
186/2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / Special Review Under Section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act
Outcome
Conviction amended to housebreaking with intent to steal; sentence confirmed.
Judges
J P Daffue
Legal Topics
Housebreaking, Intent to Steal, Criminal Procedure Act, Conviction Amendment
Criminal Law Housebreaking Intent to Steal Criminal Procedure Act Conviction Amendment

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Marshall De Kok

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Review / Special Review Under Section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction of housebreaking with intent to commit a crime unknown to the state was correct in law.
  2. 2 Whether the conviction should be amended to housebreaking with intent to steal based on the evidence presented.

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence, including the accused's admissions, clearly established that the accused broke into the premises with the intent to steal. Section 262 of the Criminal Procedure Act permits the court to convict on the specific offence proved by the evidence. It is both legally correct and necessary for the conviction to reflect housebreaking with intent to steal, rather than with intent to commit a crime unknown to the state. The conviction is therefore amended accordingly, and the sentence imposed by the magistrate is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Conviction amended to housebreaking with intent to steal; sentence confirmed.

Orders

  • The accused's previous conviction is set aside and replaced with a conviction of housebreaking with intent to steal.
  • The imposed sentence is confirmed.