S v Mcbride (A72/2012) [2013] ZAGPPHC 109 (3 May 2013)

S v Mcbride (A72/2012) [2013] ZAGPPHC 109 (3 May 2013)

The court held that none of the grounds raised by the State constituted questions of law as required by section 311(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The issues regarding the nexus between statements, the exclusion of Dr Moratioa's statement, and the acceptance of Professor van Gelder's evidence were all factual determinations made by the trial court. The compromised evidence of the accomplice witnesses did not raise a legal issue. As such, the State's application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2013] ZAGPPHC 109
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Robert McBride
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 May 2013
Case Number
A72/2012
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Under Section 311(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
Pretorius, Molopa-Sethosa
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Questions of Law, Admissibility of Evidence, Accomplice Witnesses
Criminal Law Leave to Appeal Questions of Law Admissibility of Evidence Accomplice Witnesses

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Robert McBride

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Under Section 311(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the grounds raised by the State constitute questions of law permitting an appeal under section 311(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
  2. 2 Whether the exclusion of Dr Moratioa's statement and the acceptance of Professor van Gelder's evidence are questions of law.
  3. 3 Whether the compromised evidence of accomplice witnesses raises a legal issue for appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that none of the grounds raised by the State constituted questions of law as required by section 311(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The issues regarding the nexus between statements, the exclusion of Dr Moratioa's statement, and the acceptance of Professor van Gelder's evidence were all factual determinations made by the trial court. The compromised evidence of the accomplice witnesses did not raise a legal issue. As such, the State's application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.