S v Msane and Another (96/2008) [2008] ZASCA 118; [2009] 1 All SA 454 (SCA) (26 September 2008)

S v Msane and Another (96/2008) [2008] ZASCA 118; [2009] 1 All SA 454 (SCA) (26 September 2008)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that although the conviction was altered from extortion to attempted extortion, the moral blameworthiness of the appellants, both police officers, remained high. The court found no misdirection in the regional court's consideration of personal circumstances and seriousness of the offence. However, the court determined that the possession of drugs was for the purpose of facilitating the extortion and constituted a single criminal transaction. Therefore, imposing consecutive sentences amounted to duplication of punishment. The court ordered that the sentence for possession of drugs run concurrently with the sentence for attempted extortion, thereby...

Citation
[2008] ZASCA 118
Parties
Appellant: Sipho Bonginkosi Msane; Appellant: Robert Lijuvwani Kone; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 September 2008
Case Number
96/2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From the Johannesburg High Court (full Court)
Outcome
Appeal succeeds to the extent that the sentences are to run concurrently; the order of the Johannesburg High Court is set aside and replaced.
Judges
Lewis, Mlambo, Cachalia
Legal Topics
Attempted Extortion, Sentence Appropriateness, Duplication of Punishment, Possession of Drugs
Criminal Law Attempted Extortion Sentence Appropriateness Duplication of Punishment Possession of Drugs

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sipho Bonginkosi Msane

Appellant

Robert Lijuvwani Kone

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From the Johannesburg High Court (full Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for attempted extortion should be reduced following alteration of the conviction from extortion to attempt.
  2. 2 Whether the sentences for attempted extortion and possession of drugs should run consecutively or concurrently.
  3. 3 Whether the courts below misdirected themselves in imposing consecutive sentences resulting in duplication of punishment.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that although the conviction was altered from extortion to attempted extortion, the moral blameworthiness of the appellants, both police officers, remained high. The court found no misdirection in the regional court's consideration of personal circumstances and seriousness of the offence. However, the court determined that the possession of drugs was for the purpose of facilitating the extortion and constituted a single criminal transaction. Therefore, imposing consecutive sentences amounted to duplication of punishment. The court ordered that the sentence for possession of drugs run concurrently with the sentence for attempted extortion, thereby...

Court Disposition

Appeal succeeds to the extent that the sentences are to run concurrently; the order of the Johannesburg High Court is set aside and replaced.

Orders

  • The appeal against sentence succeeds and the sentence imposed by the Regional Court is altered as follows: On count one, the accused are sentenced to four years’ imprisonment, of which one year is suspended for five years on condition that they are not convicted of extortion or contravention of the Prevention and...
  • On count two, the accused are sentenced to one year’s imprisonment, which is ordered to run concurrently with the sentence imposed on count one.