S v Makier (271/91) [1992] ZASCA 51 (30 March 1992)

S v Makier (271/91) [1992] ZASCA 51 (30 March 1992)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that, although the appellant played a leading role in the murder and had a history of violent offences, there were mitigating factors present, including significant alcohol consumption and the reasonable possibility that the murder was not premeditated but committed impulsively. The court held that these mitigating factors, while overshadowed by the aggravating circumstances, were sufficient to justify substituting the death sentence with a lengthy term of imprisonment. The court concluded that the objectives of punishment—deterrence, prevention, and retribution—could be satisfied by a sentence of 15 years' imprisonment, especially considering the...

Citation
[1992] ZASCA 51
Parties
Appellant: Dawid Makier; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 March 1992
Case Number
271/91
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld. The death sentence is set aside and replaced with a sentence of 15 years' imprisonment.
Judges
Botha, Vivier, Van Coller
Legal Topics
Murder, Sentencing, Mitigating Factors, Aggravating Factors, Death Penalty, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Mitigating Factors Aggravating Factors Death Penalty Appeal Procedure

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

Parties

Dawid Makier

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the death sentence imposed on the appellant for murder was the only appropriate sentence in light of the circumstances.
  2. 2 Whether sufficient mitigating factors existed to justify substituting the death sentence with a term of imprisonment.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's consumption of alcohol and lack of premeditation should be considered as mitigating factors.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that, although the appellant played a leading role in the murder and had a history of violent offences, there were mitigating factors present, including significant alcohol consumption and the reasonable possibility that the murder was not premeditated but committed impulsively. The court held that these mitigating factors, while overshadowed by the aggravating circumstances, were sufficient to justify substituting the death sentence with a lengthy term of imprisonment. The court concluded that the objectives of punishment—deterrence, prevention, and retribution—could be satisfied by a sentence of 15 years' imprisonment, especially considering the...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. The death sentence is set aside and replaced with a sentence of 15 years' imprisonment.

Orders

  • The death sentence imposed on the appellant is set aside.
  • The appellant is sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment for murder.