S v Ramokgoa (R18/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 122 (29 April 2021)

S v Ramokgoa (R18/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 122 (29 April 2021)

The accused's statement did not admit the element of 'breaking' required for housebreaking with intent to steal and theft. Entry was gained through an open door, which constitutes only theft. The magistrate misdirected himself by convicting the accused of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft. The conviction is set aside and substituted with theft. The sentence is adjusted accordingly to reflect the correct offence and the recovery of the stolen items.

Citation
[2021] ZAFSHC 122
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Ramokgoa
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 April 2021
Case Number
R18/2021
Procedural Posture
Review Application / High Court Review Under Section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act
Outcome
Conviction for housebreaking with intent to steal and theft set aside and substituted with conviction for theft. Sentence adjusted to a fine or suspended imprisonment for theft.
Judges
S Naidoo, C Reinders
Legal Topics
Housebreaking With Intent to Steal and Theft, Elements of Theft, Conviction Substitution, Sentence Review
Criminal Law Housebreaking With Intent to Steal and Theft Elements of Theft Conviction Substitution Sentence Review

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Ramokgoa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / High Court Review Under Section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused's plea and statement admitted all elements of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft.
  2. 2 Whether the conviction for housebreaking with intent to steal and theft was correct given the facts admitted.
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed was appropriate for the correct offence.

Ratio Decidendi

The accused's statement did not admit the element of 'breaking' required for housebreaking with intent to steal and theft. Entry was gained through an open door, which constitutes only theft. The magistrate misdirected himself by convicting the accused of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft. The conviction is set aside and substituted with theft. The sentence is adjusted accordingly to reflect the correct offence and the recovery of the stolen items.

Court Disposition

Conviction for housebreaking with intent to steal and theft set aside and substituted with conviction for theft. Sentence adjusted to a fine or suspended imprisonment for theft.

Orders

  • The conviction on a charge of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft is set aside and substituted with a conviction for theft.
  • The sentence imposed is set aside and substituted with a fine of One Thousand Rand (R1000.00) or, failing payment, ninety (90) days' imprisonment, wholly suspended for three years on condition that the accused is not convicted of theft during the suspension period.