Tatz v S (A272/2017) [2018] ZAFSHC 113 (5 July 2018)

Tatz v S (A272/2017) [2018] ZAFSHC 113 (5 July 2018)

The appeal court found that the trial court correctly approached the evidence of the accomplice, Mr Lipholo, with the necessary caution, both as a single witness and as an accomplice. The trial court's credibility findings regarding Mr Lipholo were supported by the record and not shown to be clearly wrong. The appellant's version was saturated with contradictions and improbabilities, and was properly rejected. The appellant was found in possession of the victim's stolen car and cellular phone shortly after the crime, and failed to provide a reasonably innocent explanation, justifying the application of the doctrine of recent possession. The trial court did not err in finding that the...

Citation
[2018] ZAFSHC 113
Parties
Appellant: Tshwanelo Tatz; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 July 2018
Case Number
A272/2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence in respect of each charge are confirmed.
Judges
Q Nulliah, M.H. Rampai, P.E. Molitsoane
Legal Topics
Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Murder, Accomplice Evidence, Minimum Sentencing, Recent Possession, Sentencing Disparity
Criminal Law Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Murder Accomplice Evidence Minimum Sentencing Recent Possession Sentencing Disparity

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tshwanelo Tatz

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in accepting the evidence of the accomplice, Mr Lipholo, without sufficient caution.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's version was reasonably or possibly true and should have been accepted.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court erred in finding that the State proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal court found that the trial court correctly approached the evidence of the accomplice, Mr Lipholo, with the necessary caution, both as a single witness and as an accomplice. The trial court's credibility findings regarding Mr Lipholo were supported by the record and not shown to be clearly wrong. The appellant's version was saturated with contradictions and improbabilities, and was properly rejected. The appellant was found in possession of the victim's stolen car and cellular phone shortly after the crime, and failed to provide a reasonably innocent explanation, justifying the application of the doctrine of recent possession. The trial court did not err in finding that the...

Court Disposition

The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence in respect of each charge are confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal fails in toto.
  • The conviction and the sentence in respect of each charge are confirmed.