S v Engelbrecht (374/93) [1995] ZASCA 114; [1995] 3 All SA 384 (A) (22 September 1995)

S v Engelbrecht (374/93) [1995] ZASCA 114; [1995] 3 All SA 384 (A) (22 September 1995)

The court found that the complainant's injuries were sustained at the appellant's parents' home and that her evidence, corroborated by medical and witness testimony, was credible. The appellant's denial and alternative version were rejected as false and improbable. The prosecutor's submissions at trial did not amount to a stopping of the prosecution, as his intention was not made explicit. The application to adduce further evidence was refused because the alleged discrepancies in statements were minor and immaterial. The sentence imposed was appropriate given the seriousness of the offence, and correctional supervision was not suitable. The appeal against conviction and sentence was...

Citation
[1995] ZASCA 114
Parties
Appellant: Jan Christoffel Engelbrecht; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 September 1995
Case Number
374/93
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
The application to adduce further evidence is refused. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
Judges
Joubert, Vivier, Harms, Olivier, Van Coller
Legal Topics
Rape, Adducing Further Evidence, Prosecutorial Disclosure, Credibility of Witnesses, Sentence Appeal
Criminal Law Rape Adducing Further Evidence Prosecutorial Disclosure Credibility of Witnesses Sentence Appeal

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jan Christoffel Engelbrecht

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was proved beyond reasonable doubt to have raped the complainant.
  2. 2 Whether the prosecutor's conduct amounted to a stopping of the prosecution under section 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
  3. 3 Whether the application to adduce further evidence should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the complainant's injuries were sustained at the appellant's parents' home and that her evidence, corroborated by medical and witness testimony, was credible. The appellant's denial and alternative version were rejected as false and improbable. The prosecutor's submissions at trial did not amount to a stopping of the prosecution, as his intention was not made explicit. The application to adduce further evidence was refused because the alleged discrepancies in statements were minor and immaterial. The sentence imposed was appropriate given the seriousness of the offence, and correctional supervision was not suitable. The appeal against conviction and sentence was...

Court Disposition

The application to adduce further evidence is refused. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application to adduce further evidence is refused.
  • The appeal is dismissed.