S v Mbatha (69/08) [2009] ZAECHC 4 (15 January 2009)

S v Mbatha (69/08) [2009] ZAECHC 4 (15 January 2009)

The court found that the accused were apprehended with the stolen money and items used in the housebreaking within two hours of the crime. Their explanations for possession were rejected as false and unreasonable. The confessions and Section 220 admissions were ruled admissible, having been made freely and voluntarily. The evidence against all accused was overwhelming, and the only reasonable inference was that they committed housebreaking and theft at Boxer Store. To avoid duplication of convictions and sentences, the court acquitted the accused on counts of conspiracy and theft, convicting all seven accused on the count of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft.

Citation
[2009] ZAECHC 4
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Sipho Mpiyomndeni Mbatha; Respondent: Thembinkosi Celumbuso Mvubu; Respondent: Patrick Sibongiseni Simelane; Respondent: Lama Ephriam Navess; Respondent: Sam Sipho Leshaba; Respondent: Joyce Tukamelo; Respondent: Seroke Kortjas
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 January 2009
Case Number
69/08
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Judgment After Trial Within a Trial and Main Trial
Outcome
All seven accused found guilty of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft (Count 2). Acquitted on conspiracy (Count 1) and theft (Count 3) to avoid duplication of convictions.
Judges
M.W. Mkhize
Legal Topics
Housebreaking, Theft, Recent Possession, Admissibility of Confessions, Section 220 Admissions, Criminal Procedure Act
Criminal Law Housebreaking Theft Recent Possession Admissibility of Confessions Section 220 Admissions Criminal Procedure Act

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Sipho Mpiyomndeni Mbatha

Respondent

Thembinkosi Celumbuso Mvubu

Respondent

Patrick Sibongiseni Simelane

Respondent

Lama Ephriam Navess

Respondent

Sam Sipho Leshaba

Respondent

Joyce Tukamelo

Respondent

Seroke Kortjas

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Judgment After Trial Within a Trial and Main Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused conspired to commit housebreaking and theft.
  2. 2 Whether the accused unlawfully broke into Boxer Store with intent to steal.
  3. 3 Whether the accused stole R253,802.20 from Boxer Store.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the accused were apprehended with the stolen money and items used in the housebreaking within two hours of the crime. Their explanations for possession were rejected as false and unreasonable. The confessions and Section 220 admissions were ruled admissible, having been made freely and voluntarily. The evidence against all accused was overwhelming, and the only reasonable inference was that they committed housebreaking and theft at Boxer Store. To avoid duplication of convictions and sentences, the court acquitted the accused on counts of conspiracy and theft, convicting all seven accused on the count of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft.

Court Disposition

All seven accused found guilty of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft (Count 2). Acquitted on conspiracy (Count 1) and theft (Count 3) to avoid duplication of convictions.

Orders

  • All accused are convicted on Count 2: housebreaking with intent to steal and theft.
  • All accused are acquitted on Counts 1 and 3 to avoid duplication of convictions.