S v Xhanti and Another (495/1989) [1990] ZASCA 22 (22 March 1990)

S v Xhanti and Another (495/1989) [1990] ZASCA 22 (22 March 1990)

The court found that the first appellant was a fully conscious and willing participant in both the planning and execution of the robbery, and that he foresaw and reconciled himself to the possibility of the deceased being killed during the commission of the crime. His subsequent conduct, including driving the stolen vehicle and disposing of stolen property, further demonstrated his association with the crime and its consequences. The court rejected his attempt to minimize his role and found his testimony to be wholly unreliable. In contrast, the conviction of the second appellant was based primarily on the identification evidence of a single witness, which was found to be unreliable,...

Citation
[1990] ZASCA 22
Parties
Appellant: Welile Xhanti; Appellant: Gavin Joseph Menemene; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 March 1990
Case Number
495/1989
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
The appeal of the first appellant is dismissed; the appeal of the second appellant is upheld.
Judges
Botha, Vivier, Kumleben
Legal Topics
Murder, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Identification Evidence, Appeal Against Conviction, Mens Rea
Criminal Law Murder Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Identification Evidence Appeal Against Conviction Mens Rea

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

Parties

Welile Xhanti

Appellant

Gavin Joseph Menemene

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the convictions of murder and robbery with aggravating circumstances against both appellants were justified.
  2. 2 Whether the identification evidence against the second appellant was reliable and sufficient.
  3. 3 Whether the first appellant's participation amounted to the requisite intent for murder.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first appellant was a fully conscious and willing participant in both the planning and execution of the robbery, and that he foresaw and reconciled himself to the possibility of the deceased being killed during the commission of the crime. His subsequent conduct, including driving the stolen vehicle and disposing of stolen property, further demonstrated his association with the crime and its consequences. The court rejected his attempt to minimize his role and found his testimony to be wholly unreliable. In contrast, the conviction of the second appellant was based primarily on the identification evidence of a single witness, which was found to be unreliable,...

Court Disposition

The appeal of the first appellant is dismissed; the appeal of the second appellant is upheld.

Orders

  • The appeal of Welile Xhanti is dismissed.
  • The appeal of Gavin Joseph Menemene is upheld.