S v Morapela (2/91) [1991] ZASCA 106 (17 September 1991)

S v Morapela (2/91) [1991] ZASCA 106 (17 September 1991)

The court held that while the violence accompanying the rape was severe and aggravating, it had already been fully considered in the conviction and sentence for attempted murder. To avoid double punishment, the violence could not be given excessive weight as an aggravating factor in sentencing for rape. The circumstances were serious, involving an elderly victim attacked in her home, and the appellant had prior convictions, including for rape involving violence. However, the case was not so exceptionally grave as to require the death sentence. A lengthy term of imprisonment would adequately serve the objectives of punishment, including deterrence, prevention, and possible rehabilitation....

Citation
[1991] ZASCA 106
Parties
Appellant: Edwin Moeketsi Morapela; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 September 1991
Case Number
2/91
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Automatic Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against the death sentence for rape upheld; death sentence set aside and replaced with 20 years' imprisonment. Portions of sentences for housebreaking and attempted murder ordered to run concurrently.
Judges
Smalberger, F H Grosskopf, Harms
Legal Topics
Sentencing Principles, Rape, Attempted Murder, Aggravating and Mitigating Factors, Cumulative Sentences, Double Punishment
Criminal Law Sentencing Principles Rape Attempted Murder Aggravating and Mitigating Factors Cumulative Sentences Double Punishment

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

Parties

Edwin Moeketsi Morapela

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Automatic Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the death sentence imposed for rape was the only appropriate sentence in the circumstances.
  2. 2 To what extent the violence accompanying the rape should be considered in sentencing, given the separate conviction for attempted murder.
  3. 3 Whether the cumulative effect of sentences resulted in double punishment for the same conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that while the violence accompanying the rape was severe and aggravating, it had already been fully considered in the conviction and sentence for attempted murder. To avoid double punishment, the violence could not be given excessive weight as an aggravating factor in sentencing for rape. The circumstances were serious, involving an elderly victim attacked in her home, and the appellant had prior convictions, including for rape involving violence. However, the case was not so exceptionally grave as to require the death sentence. A lengthy term of imprisonment would adequately serve the objectives of punishment, including deterrence, prevention, and possible rehabilitation....

Court Disposition

Appeal against the death sentence for rape upheld; death sentence set aside and replaced with 20 years' imprisonment. Portions of sentences for housebreaking and attempted murder ordered to run concurrently.

Orders

  • The death sentence on count 2 (rape) is set aside and replaced with a sentence of 20 years' imprisonment.
  • Thirteen years of the 16-year sentence for housebreaking (count 1) and five years of the seven-year sentence for attempted murder (count 3) are to be served concurrently with the 20-year sentence for rape (count 2).