S v Faye (CA & R68/08) [2008] ZAECHC 133 (13 August 2008)

S v Faye (CA & R68/08) [2008] ZAECHC 133 (13 August 2008)

The court held that the magistrate did not misdirect himself in finding no substantial and compelling circumstances in relation to the second conviction. Even if there was an error regarding the first conviction, the sentence imposed was below the statutory minimum. The court found no reason why statutory minimum sentences could not be ordered to run concurrently. The cumulative sentence of 20 years' imprisonment was deemed appropriate and just for a young man who committed two murders in separate incidents over 18 months. The magistrate properly considered the appellant's youth, lack of previous convictions, and the interests of society, as well as the appellant's aggressive disposition...

Citation
[2008] ZAECHC 133
Parties
Appellant: Faye; Respondent: State
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 August 2008
Case Number
CA & R68/08
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against sentence dismissed; sentences confirmed.
Judges
J G Grogan, J W Jones
Legal Topics
Minimum Sentences, Substantial and Compelling Circumstances, Concurrent Sentences, Murder, Sentencing Discretion
Criminal Law Minimum Sentences Substantial and Compelling Circumstances Concurrent Sentences Murder Sentencing Discretion

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

Parties

Faye

Appellant

State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the magistrate erred in not finding substantial and compelling circumstances to impose lesser sentences for both murder convictions.
  2. 2 Whether the sentences imposed were appropriate and just in light of the appellant's personal circumstances and the interests of society.
  3. 3 Whether statutory minimum sentences may be ordered to run concurrently.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the magistrate did not misdirect himself in finding no substantial and compelling circumstances in relation to the second conviction. Even if there was an error regarding the first conviction, the sentence imposed was below the statutory minimum. The court found no reason why statutory minimum sentences could not be ordered to run concurrently. The cumulative sentence of 20 years' imprisonment was deemed appropriate and just for a young man who committed two murders in separate incidents over 18 months. The magistrate properly considered the appellant's youth, lack of previous convictions, and the interests of society, as well as the appellant's aggressive disposition...

Court Disposition

Appeal against sentence dismissed; sentences confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal against sentence is dismissed.
  • The sentences imposed by the magistrate are confirmed.