Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Montsho v S (A134/2019) [2025] ZAGPJHC 510 (27 May 2025)
The High Court upheld the robbery conviction and sentence, but set aside the firearm convictions after finding the admission inadmissible and joint possession unproved.
S v Mapasa and Others (CC32/2024) [2024] ZAECELLC 39 (26 August 2024)
High Court ruling in a criminal trial-within-a-trial admitting a confession, a pointing out, and an admission after finding they were made voluntarily and with rights explained.
Van Tonder v S (CA&R 125/2022) [2023] ZAECMKHC 30 (14 March 2023)
Conviction for murder, theft and negligent driving was upheld, but the High Court reduced the sentence after finding material misdirection in sentencing.
Mthunzi v S (A105/2019) [2021] ZAGPJHC 153 (13 April 2021)
The High Court dismissed an appeal against murder and robbery convictions, upholding reliance on a child single witness, corroborating evidence, and minimum sentences.
Moeti v Regional Court Magistrate: Regional Court 1, Pretoria North and Another (A172/19) [2020] ZAGPPHC 176 (29 April 2020)
The High Court dismissed a review of a magistrate’s refusal to separate a criminal trial, holding that co-accused admissions did not justify separation or show actual prejudice.
Msebenzi v S (A722/15) [2017] ZAGPPHC 470 (27 June 2017)
The High Court partially upheld an appeal arising from convictions for arson, murder and attempted murder, but reduced the assault conviction to common assault.
Morojelle and Others v S (A68/2014) [2014] ZAFSHC 152 (11 September 2014)
The Free State High Court upheld an appeal and set aside the convictions and sentences of three appellants for robbery, receiving stolen property, and firearm-related counts.
Fransen v S (A256/07) [2008] ZAWCHC 26 (16 May 2008)
The court held that the appellant's conviction was justified based on his possession of recently stolen goods and his palpably false and improbable explanations for such possession. The Magistrate did not rely on any admissions made by the appellant but rather on the logical inferences drawn from the facts, supported by the corroborated testimony of State witnesses. The appellant's explanations were rejected as unsatisfactory, and the evidence established that he was in possession of goods stolen during the housebreaking. The doctrine of recent possession, as established in R v Gentleman and…
Source excerpt
S v Mahlathi (CA309/2006) [2008] ZAECHC 11 (21 February 2008)
The High Court held that an admission in a warning statement was admissible under s 219A without certification by the accused, and dismissed the appeal.
S v Mlomo (581/91) [1993] ZASCA 93; [1993] 2 All SA 484 (A) (2 June 1993)
The court held that the failure to inform the appellant of his right to legal representation did not render the admissions inadmissible, as there was no evidence that the appellant was unaware of his rights or that the irregularity resulted in a failure of justice. The admissions made during the preliminary proceedings were found to be voluntary and carried full evidential weight. The appellant's involvement in the murders and assault was established through his own admissions and corroborating evidence, satisfying the requirements for common purpose liability. The sentence imposed was deemed…
Source excerpt
Explore more
