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
S v Ramatar (171201/17) [2018] ZAWCHC 71; 2018 (2) SACR 414 (WCC) (30 May 2018)
Automatic review of a regional court conviction was set aside after the magistrate improperly elicited the accused’s prior convictions before plea and conviction.
S v Maluleke (A950/2014) [2015] ZAGPPHC 20 (6 January 2015)
Automatic review of a guilty plea was set aside because the magistrate’s section 112 questioning was inadequate and unproven previous convictions were considered.
S v Mankayi (243/2013) [2013] ZAECGHC 79 (15 August 2013)
High Court review of a juvenile murder sentence. The court held the magistrate improperly relied on unproven prior convictions and imposed sentence afresh.
Nkuna v S (A62/2012) [2013] ZAGPPHC 111; 2013 (2) SACR 541 (GNP) (6 May 2013)
The court held that the magistrate's prior knowledge of the appellant's previous convictions, acquired during the bail application, created a reasonable apprehension of bias and rendered him disqualified from presiding over the trial. The magistrate's conduct during sentencing further demonstrated a lack of impartiality. This irregularity nullified the proceedings regardless of the merits. Additionally, the conviction based on circumstantial evidence did not meet the required legal standard, as the facts did not exclude other reasonable inferences and amounted to speculation rather than proof…
Source excerpt
S v Mazibuko an Others (384/87) [1988] ZASCA 25 (29 March 1988)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in refusing to allow cross-examination of accused no 1 on his previous convictions under section 197(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act, as no judicial discretion exists to prohibit such questioning when the statutory requirements are met. Furthermore, the trial court failed to properly interpret accused no 1's statement during argument as a potential application to re-open his case, particularly given his unrepresented status. These procedural irregularities, especially the failure to canvass the possibility of accidental discharge of…
Source excerpt
S v Mavuso (71/86) [1987] ZASCA 48 (21 May 1987)
The court held that questioning the accused about a prior dagga conviction was irrelevant and inadmissible, and the resulting irregularity warranted reversal.
Explore more
