S v Lengane (233/89) [1989] ZASCA 168 (30 November 1989)

S v Lengane (233/89) [1989] ZASCA 168 (30 November 1989)

The court found that the appellant unlawfully stabbed the deceased during the commission of a robbery and that his version of self-defence was not credible. The evidence of the witness Seleke was accepted as reliable and corroborated by the medical findings. The appellant, though young and a first offender, acted with the necessary intent to kill, as he was subjectively aware of the risk of death from his actions and proceeded regardless. However, the court held that the trial court erred in its approach to mitigating circumstances, focusing incorrectly on the nature of the act rather than the offender. Given the appellant's youth (18 years and 4 months), lack of prior offences, and the...

Citation
[1989] ZASCA 168
Parties
Appellant: Nicholas Muzi Lengane; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 November 1989
Case Number
233/89
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence upheld. Death sentence set aside and replaced with 12 years' imprisonment.
Judges
Botha, Steyn, Eksteen
Legal Topics
Murder, Sentencing, Mitigating Circumstances, Youth Offenders, Intent, Self Defence
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Mitigating Circumstances Youth Offenders Intent Self Defence

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

Parties

Nicholas Muzi Lengane

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was correctly convicted of murder.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant acted with the necessary intent to kill.
  3. 3 Whether there were mitigating circumstances warranting a sentence less than the death penalty.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant unlawfully stabbed the deceased during the commission of a robbery and that his version of self-defence was not credible. The evidence of the witness Seleke was accepted as reliable and corroborated by the medical findings. The appellant, though young and a first offender, acted with the necessary intent to kill, as he was subjectively aware of the risk of death from his actions and proceeded regardless. However, the court held that the trial court erred in its approach to mitigating circumstances, focusing incorrectly on the nature of the act rather than the offender. Given the appellant's youth (18 years and 4 months), lack of prior offences, and the...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence upheld. Death sentence set aside and replaced with 12 years' imprisonment.

Orders

  • The appeal against the conviction for murder is dismissed.
  • The appeal against the death sentence succeeds.