S v Makhetha and Others [2009] ZAFSHC 90 (25 September 2009)

S v Makhetha and Others [2009] ZAFSHC 90 (25 September 2009)

The review court found that in all the matters, the magistrate failed to ensure that the charges were properly put to the accused, that the accused understood the charges, and that the prosecutor accepted the pleas. The accused's rights regarding mitigation of sentence were not explained, and no inquiry was held to elicit relevant factors for sentencing. Most accused were unrepresented and unsophisticated, making it imperative for the magistrate to conduct a proper inquiry. The proceedings were not in accordance with justice, and the convictions and sentences must be set aside.

Citation
[2009] ZAFSHC 90
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Lebohang Makhetha; Respondent: Maramang David Mariti; Respondent: Thsediso Makgale; Respondent: Nthatuwa Tauhadi; Respondent: Lebakeng Matjeka; Respondent: Shanti Nkunyane
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 September 2009
Case Number
498/2009
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Special Review Under Section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act
Outcome
Convictions and sentences in all the above-mentioned matters are set aside.
Judges
A. F. Jordaan, C. B. Cillié
Legal Topics
Criminal Procedure Act Section 304, Immigration Act Section 49, Guilty Plea Procedure, Mitigation of Sentence, Unrepresented Accused Rights
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Criminal Procedure Act Section 304 Immigration Act Section 49 Guilty Plea Procedure Mitigation of Sentence Unrepresented Accused Rights

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Lebohang Makhetha

Respondent

Maramang David Mariti

Respondent

Thsediso Makgale

Respondent

Nthatuwa Tauhadi

Respondent

Lebakeng Matjeka

Respondent

Shanti Nkunyane

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Special Review Under Section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceedings in the magistrate's court complied with the requirements of justice.
  2. 2 Whether the accused's rights to legal representation and mitigation of sentence were properly explained and protected.
  3. 3 Whether the charges were properly put to the accused and pleas properly accepted by the prosecutor.

Ratio Decidendi

The review court found that in all the matters, the magistrate failed to ensure that the charges were properly put to the accused, that the accused understood the charges, and that the prosecutor accepted the pleas. The accused's rights regarding mitigation of sentence were not explained, and no inquiry was held to elicit relevant factors for sentencing. Most accused were unrepresented and unsophisticated, making it imperative for the magistrate to conduct a proper inquiry. The proceedings were not in accordance with justice, and the convictions and sentences must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Convictions and sentences in all the above-mentioned matters are set aside.

Orders

  • The convictions and sentences in all the above-mentioned matters are set aside.