S v Mello (555/91) [1992] ZASCA 214 (27 November 1992)

S v Mello (555/91) [1992] ZASCA 214 (27 November 1992)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court correctly admitted the appellant's confession and plea explanation as evidence, finding that the appellant was not improperly influenced by the investigating officer. The court found that the appellant's version was improbable and contradicted by the medical evidence and the confession. The evidence established that the appellant intentionally killed the deceased, either by strangulation with a tracksuit jacket or by suffocation, and robbed him of his possessions. However, the court found that the case did not warrant the death sentence as the only appropriate punishment, given the absence of premeditation, the appellant's personal...

Citation
[1992] ZASCA 214
Parties
Appellant: Andries Mello; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 November 1992
Case Number
555/91
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
The appeal against the convictions on counts 1 (murder) and 2 (robbery with aggravating circumstances) and the sentence on count 2 is dismissed. The appeal against the death sentence on count 1 succeeds; the death sentence is set aside and replaced with a sentence of 20 years' imprisonment, to run concurrently with...
Judges
A P van Coller, E M Grosskopf, Kumleben
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Confession, Murder, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Unlawful Possession of Firearm, Sentencing Principles, Dolus Eventualis
Criminal Law Admissibility of Confession Murder Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Unlawful Possession of Firearm Sentencing Principles Dolus Eventualis

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andries Mello

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the confession made by the appellant was admissible as evidence.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant had the requisite intent to commit murder (dolus directus or dolus eventualis).
  3. 3 Whether the death sentence was the only appropriate punishment for the murder committed.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court correctly admitted the appellant's confession and plea explanation as evidence, finding that the appellant was not improperly influenced by the investigating officer. The court found that the appellant's version was improbable and contradicted by the medical evidence and the confession. The evidence established that the appellant intentionally killed the deceased, either by strangulation with a tracksuit jacket or by suffocation, and robbed him of his possessions. However, the court found that the case did not warrant the death sentence as the only appropriate punishment, given the absence of premeditation, the appellant's personal...

Court Disposition

The appeal against the convictions on counts 1 (murder) and 2 (robbery with aggravating circumstances) and the sentence on count 2 is dismissed. The appeal against the death sentence on count 1 succeeds; the death sentence is set aside and replaced with a sentence of 20 years' imprisonment, to run concurrently with...

Orders

  • The appeal against the convictions on counts 1 and 2 and the sentence on count 2 is dismissed.
  • The appeal against the death sentence on count 1 succeeds.