S v Du Plooy (123/96) [1996] ZASCA 124 (7 November 1996)

S v Du Plooy (123/96) [1996] ZASCA 124 (7 November 1996)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court was correct in accepting the identification evidence against the appellant and rejecting his alibi. The witnesses were credible, had no motive to falsely implicate the appellant, and had ample opportunity to observe him during the attack. However, the appellant only joined the attack after the fatal shot had already been fired at Lindsay. Therefore, he could not be convicted of murder but was guilty of attempted murder, as his subsequent conduct demonstrated a clear intent to kill. Despite the change in conviction, the aggravating circumstances of the attack justified the imposition of the same sentence as originally handed down by...

Citation
[1996] ZASCA 124
Parties
Appellant: Benjamin Du Plooy; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 November 1996
Case Number
123/96
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction succeeds in part; conviction for murder set aside and substituted with conviction for attempted murder. Appeal against sentence dismissed; sentence confirmed.
Judges
Vivier, Nienaber, Harms
Legal Topics
Attempted Murder, Joint Enterprise, Identification Evidence, Gang Related Offences
Criminal Law Attempted Murder Joint Enterprise Identification Evidence Gang Related Offences

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Du Plooy

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court correctly accepted the identification evidence against the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was properly convicted of murder or only of attempted murder.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's alibi was credible.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court was correct in accepting the identification evidence against the appellant and rejecting his alibi. The witnesses were credible, had no motive to falsely implicate the appellant, and had ample opportunity to observe him during the attack. However, the appellant only joined the attack after the fatal shot had already been fired at Lindsay. Therefore, he could not be convicted of murder but was guilty of attempted murder, as his subsequent conduct demonstrated a clear intent to kill. Despite the change in conviction, the aggravating circumstances of the attack justified the imposition of the same sentence as originally handed down by...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction succeeds in part; conviction for murder set aside and substituted with conviction for attempted murder. Appeal against sentence dismissed; sentence confirmed.

Orders

  • The conviction of murder on count 2 is set aside and replaced with a conviction of attempted murder.
  • The sentence imposed by the trial court is confirmed.