S v Mashiane and Another (CC 91/2018; 10/2/11/1-L58/2018) [2020] ZALMPPHC 55 (10 June 2020)

S v Mashiane and Another (CC 91/2018; 10/2/11/1-L58/2018) [2020] ZALMPPHC 55 (10 June 2020)

The court found that the offences committed by both accused were of an extremely serious and violent nature, involving murder, rape, and aggravated robbery. The doctrine of common purpose was applicable, as both accused acted together in the commission of the crimes. The court considered the personal circumstances of the accused, including their ages, family responsibilities, and lack of previous convictions (for accused 2), but determined that these factors, individually or cumulatively, did not constitute substantial and compelling circumstances to justify a departure from the mandatory minimum sentences prescribed by the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997. The court emphasized the...

Citation
[2020] ZALMPPHC 55
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: Mashiane, Kabelo Raymond; Defendant: Mathabatha, Johannes Kgaugelo
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 June 2020
Case Number
CC 91/2018; 10/2/11/1-L58/2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Sentencing
Outcome
Both accused sentenced to two life terms of imprisonment and additional concurrent sentences for aggravated robbery and firearm offences. Both declared unfit to possess arms under section 103 of Act 60 of 2000.
Judges
Mudau
Legal Topics
Murder, Rape, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Mandatory Minimum Sentences, Common Purpose, Possession of Prohibited Firearm
Criminal Law Murder Rape Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Mandatory Minimum Sentences Common Purpose Possession of Prohibited Firearm

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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Mashiane, Kabelo Raymond

Defendant

Mathabatha, Johannes Kgaugelo

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether substantial and compelling circumstances exist to justify departure from mandatory minimum sentences for murder, rape, and aggravated robbery.
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of common purpose applies to both accused for the offences charged.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate sentence for each accused given the seriousness of the offences and their personal circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the offences committed by both accused were of an extremely serious and violent nature, involving murder, rape, and aggravated robbery. The doctrine of common purpose was applicable, as both accused acted together in the commission of the crimes. The court considered the personal circumstances of the accused, including their ages, family responsibilities, and lack of previous convictions (for accused 2), but determined that these factors, individually or cumulatively, did not constitute substantial and compelling circumstances to justify a departure from the mandatory minimum sentences prescribed by the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997. The court emphasized the...

Court Disposition

Both accused sentenced to two life terms of imprisonment and additional concurrent sentences for aggravated robbery and firearm offences. Both declared unfit to possess arms under section 103 of Act 60 of 2000.

Orders

  • On count 1 (murder): life imprisonment for each accused.
  • On counts 2 and 3 (robbery with aggravating circumstances): 15 years imprisonment for each count for each accused.