S v Morgan en 'n Ander (A397/2004) [2005] ZAGPHC 233 (3 May 2005)

S v Morgan en 'n Ander (A397/2004) [2005] ZAGPHC 233 (3 May 2005)

The court found that the trial court did not err in admitting the pointing out evidence, as the evidence established that the pointing out was made voluntarily and without undue influence. The police officers' testimony was credible, and the appellants' version of assault and intimidation was rejected as improbable and unsupported. The identification evidence from witnesses was reliable and corroborated by circumstantial evidence, including the recovery of the firearm and forensic findings. The court held that the State proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants were the perpetrators. Regarding sentence, the court found no substantial and compelling circumstances for appellant 1...

Citation
[2005] ZAGPHC 233
Parties
Appellant: Victor Morgan; Appellant: Thebogo Michael Sandy Morgan; Respondent: The State
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 May 2005
Case Number
A397/2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
The appeal against conviction is dismissed. The appeal against sentence succeeds in part for appellant 2.
Judges
S J Mynhardt, J B Shongwe, P M Mabuse
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Identification, Minimum Sentencing, Mitigating and Aggravating Factors, Firearms Control Act, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Admissibility of Evidence Identification Minimum Sentencing Mitigating and Aggravating Factors Firearms Control Act Appeal Procedure

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Victor Morgan

Appellant

Thebogo Michael Sandy Morgan

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence of the pointing out by the appellants.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court erred in attaching evidentiary value to the pointing out evidence.
  3. 3 Whether the State proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants were the perpetrators of the offences.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial court did not err in admitting the pointing out evidence, as the evidence established that the pointing out was made voluntarily and without undue influence. The police officers' testimony was credible, and the appellants' version of assault and intimidation was rejected as improbable and unsupported. The identification evidence from witnesses was reliable and corroborated by circumstantial evidence, including the recovery of the firearm and forensic findings. The court held that the State proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants were the perpetrators. Regarding sentence, the court found no substantial and compelling circumstances for appellant 1...

Court Disposition

The appeal against conviction is dismissed. The appeal against sentence succeeds in part for appellant 2.

Orders

  • For appellant 1: Appeal against conviction dismissed; sentences confirmed as imposed by the trial court.
  • For appellant 2: Sentences on counts 1 and 3 reduced to 25 years and 10 years imprisonment respectively; sentences on other counts confirmed; sentences to run concurrently with count 1; sentences backdated to 13 September 2002.