S v Jansen (480/87) [1988] ZASCA 68; [1989] 3 All SA 439 (AD) (27 May 1988)

S v Jansen (480/87) [1988] ZASCA 68; [1989] 3 All SA 439 (AD) (27 May 1988)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial judge misdirected himself by placing undue emphasis on the appellant's criminal record, particularly convictions unrelated to sexual offences against females, and by failing to adequately consider the effect of intoxication on the appellant's conduct. The judge did not properly weigh whether a lengthy term of imprisonment would suffice as punishment, as required by established principles. The misdirections were material and rendered the exercise of discretion improper, entitling the appellate court to reconsider the sentence. Given the circumstances, including the mitigating effect of intoxication and the lack of evidence that the appellant...

Citation
[1988] ZASCA 68
Parties
Appellant: Hendrik Jansen; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 May 1988
Case Number
480/87
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld; death sentence set aside and replaced with 25 years' imprisonment.
Judges
Hoexter, Kumleben, Nicholas
Legal Topics
Rape, Sentencing Discretion, Death Penalty, Intoxication, Recidivism
Criminal Law Rape Sentencing Discretion Death Penalty Intoxication Recidivism

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

Parties

Hendrik Jansen

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge misdirected himself in imposing the death sentence for rape.
  2. 2 Whether excessive emphasis was placed on the appellant's criminal record.
  3. 3 Whether sufficient weight was given to the effect of intoxication on the appellant's conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial judge misdirected himself by placing undue emphasis on the appellant's criminal record, particularly convictions unrelated to sexual offences against females, and by failing to adequately consider the effect of intoxication on the appellant's conduct. The judge did not properly weigh whether a lengthy term of imprisonment would suffice as punishment, as required by established principles. The misdirections were material and rendered the exercise of discretion improper, entitling the appellate court to reconsider the sentence. Given the circumstances, including the mitigating effect of intoxication and the lack of evidence that the appellant...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; death sentence set aside and replaced with 25 years' imprisonment.

Orders

  • The appeal against sentence is upheld.
  • The death sentence imposed on the appellant is set aside.