S v Mohapi (58/2011) [2011] ZAFSHC 94 (14 April 2011)
- Citation
- [2011] ZAFSHC 94
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
- Panel
- Kruger
- Case number
- 58/2011
More details
- Court
- Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
- Panel
- Kruger
- Case number
- 58/2011
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The accused did not admit all the elements of the offence during the plea proceedings, specifically stating she did not intend to injure the complainant. The magistrate should have recorded a plea of not guilty in terms of section 113 of Act 51 of 1977. As a result, the conviction and sentence are set aside and the matter is remitted for proper plea recording.
Court disposition
Conviction and sentence set aside; magistrate directed to record a plea of not guilty.
Orders
- The conviction and sentence are set aside in terms of section 312 of Act 51 of 1977.
- The magistrate is directed to record a plea of not guilty as contemplated in section 113 of Act 51 of 1977.
02
Material facts
Parties
The State
ApplicantLerato Alina Mohapi
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Fine Imposed: ZAR 1,500
03
Procedural history
Posture
Review Application / High Court Review Under Section 302 of Act 51 of 1977
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the accused admitted all elements of the offence during the plea proceedings.
- 02
Whether the magistrate should have recorded a plea of not guilty under section 113 of Act 51 of 1977.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The State relied on the accused's plea of guilty and her responses to questions under section 112(1)(b), which indicated she and the complainant were fighting but did not intend to injure the complainant.
- Respondent
- The accused stated she did not intend to injure the complainant, suggesting she did not admit all elements of the offence, and therefore a plea of not guilty should have been recorded.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 112(1)(b) and section 113 of Act 51 of 1977
A conviction on a plea of guilty requires the accused to admit all elements of the offence; if not, section 113 of Act 51 of 1977 requires a plea of not guilty to be entered.
- 02
Section 312 of Act 51 of 1977
On review, the court must set aside a conviction and sentence if the plea procedure was not properly followed and direct the magistrate to record a plea of not guilty.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The accused did not admit all the elements of the offence during the plea proceedings, specifically stating she did not intend to injure the complainant. The magistrate should have recorded a plea of not guilty in terms of section 113 of Act 51 of 1977. As a result, the conviction and sentence are set aside and the matter is remitted for proper plea recording.
Obiter and limits
- The delay in the review process was caused by late receipt of the transcribed record from the recording company.
Court disposition
Conviction and sentence set aside; magistrate directed to record a plea of not guilty.
- The conviction and sentence are set aside in terms of section 312 of Act 51 of 1977.
- The magistrate is directed to record a plea of not guilty as contemplated in section 113 of Act 51 of 1977.
Source and reliance status
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Judgment
FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH
AFRICA
Review No: 58/2011
In the matters between:
THE STATE
and
LERATO ALINA MOHAPI
_____________
JUDGMENT BY: KRUGER, J
DELIVERED ON: 14 APRIL 2011
[1] This is a review under section 302 of Act 51 of 1977. The accused was on 6 December 2010 convicted on her plea of guilty of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm in the magistrates’ court at Zastron and sentenced to 9 months’ imprisonment, wholly suspended and further given a fine of R1 500,00 or 3 months’ imprisonment. The J4 does not indicate whether the fine was paid. The review was only received by the registrar on 9 February 2011 as a result of the fact that the transcribed record was only received from the recording company on 28 February 2011.
[2] In answer to questions under section 112(1)(b) by the magistrate the accused said that she and the complainant were fighting and that she did not intend to injure the complainant. Jordaan J asked the magistrate whether the accused admitted all the elements of the offence. The magistrate agrees that a plea of not guilty in terms of section 113 of Act 51 of 1977 should have been recorded.
[3] The following order is made:
In terms of section 312 of Act 51 of 1977 the conviction and sentence are set aside and the magistrate is directed to record a plea of not guilty as contemplated in section 113 of Act 51 of 1977.
____
A. KRUGER, J
/EB
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.