S v White (CA&R 08/2021) [2021] ZAECGHC 4 (20 January 2021)

S v White (CA&R 08/2021) [2021] ZAECGHC 4 (20 January 2021)

The accused was under 18 at the time of the offence but over 18 at trial. The Child Justice Act provides that the DPP may, in prescribed circumstances, direct that such persons be dealt with under child justice procedures. The offence was serious (Schedule 3), and none of the circumstances for referral under section 4(2) were present. The DPP did not exercise discretion to invoke child justice procedures. The conviction for sexual assault is sustainable under section 270 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The proceedings were in accordance with justice, and the matter is remitted for sentencing, with the magistrate required to consider the accused's age and personal circumstances, and to...

Citation
[2021] ZAECGHC 4
Parties
Respondent: THE STATE; Applicant: MELVINO WHITE
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 January 2021
Case Number
CA&R 08/2021
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Special Review Following Referral by Regional Magistrate Prior to Sentencing.
Outcome
Proceedings before the regional magistrate are declared to be in accordance with justice; conviction confirmed; matter remitted for sentencing.
Judges
Bloem, Rugunanan
Legal Topics
Child Justice Act, Sentencing Procedure, Sexual Offences, Competent Verdict, Preliminary Inquiry
Criminal Law Family and Children Child Justice Act Sentencing Procedure Sexual Offences Competent Verdict Preliminary Inquiry

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE STATE

Respondent

MELVINO WHITE

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Special Review Following Referral by Regional Magistrate Prior to Sentencing.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused, who was under 18 at the time of the offence but over 18 at trial, should have been dealt with under the Child Justice Act.
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings and conviction for sexual assault were in accordance with justice given the accused's age and the absence of certain reports.
  3. 3 Whether the magistrate was correct to refer the matter for special review and refrain from sentencing.

Ratio Decidendi

The accused was under 18 at the time of the offence but over 18 at trial. The Child Justice Act provides that the DPP may, in prescribed circumstances, direct that such persons be dealt with under child justice procedures. The offence was serious (Schedule 3), and none of the circumstances for referral under section 4(2) were present. The DPP did not exercise discretion to invoke child justice procedures. The conviction for sexual assault is sustainable under section 270 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The proceedings were in accordance with justice, and the matter is remitted for sentencing, with the magistrate required to consider the accused's age and personal circumstances, and to...

Court Disposition

Proceedings before the regional magistrate are declared to be in accordance with justice; conviction confirmed; matter remitted for sentencing.

Orders

  • The proceedings before the regional magistrate in the court a quo are declared to be in accordance with justice.
  • The accused's conviction is confirmed.