Sandawane v S (A66/2016) [2016] ZAFSHC 154 (30 June 2016)

Sandawane v S (A66/2016) [2016] ZAFSHC 154 (30 June 2016)

The court found the complainant's evidence to be credible, consistent, and corroborated by other witnesses. The appellant's denial and refusal to testify left the State's version uncontroverted. The court held that the first three acts of penetration were closely linked in time and place and could be regarded as a single prolonged act of rape, but the final act of penetration, which occurred after walking away from the initial scene and returning, constituted a separate new act of rape driven by a new intent. This placed the offence within Part 1 of Schedule 2, read with section 51(1) of Act 105 of 1997, requiring life imprisonment unless substantial and compelling circumstances justified...

Citation
[2016] ZAFSHC 154
Parties
Appellant: Malefetsane Joseph Sandawane; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 June 2016
Case Number
A66/2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence of life imprisonment confirmed.
Judges
Murray, Lekale
Legal Topics
Rape, Minimum Sentencing, Multiple Acts of Rape, Credibility of Witnesses, Substantial and Compelling Circumstances
Criminal Law Rape Minimum Sentencing Multiple Acts of Rape Credibility of Witnesses Substantial and Compelling Circumstances

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 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malefetsane Joseph Sandawane

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant committed rape as charged.
  2. 2 Whether the conviction should be for multiple acts of rape or a single act.
  3. 3 Whether the sentence of life imprisonment is justified under the minimum sentencing regime.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the complainant's evidence to be credible, consistent, and corroborated by other witnesses. The appellant's denial and refusal to testify left the State's version uncontroverted. The court held that the first three acts of penetration were closely linked in time and place and could be regarded as a single prolonged act of rape, but the final act of penetration, which occurred after walking away from the initial scene and returning, constituted a separate new act of rape driven by a new intent. This placed the offence within Part 1 of Schedule 2, read with section 51(1) of Act 105 of 1997, requiring life imprisonment unless substantial and compelling circumstances justified...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence of life imprisonment confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The appellant's conviction and sentence are confirmed.