South Africa Case Law

S v Selani (CC13/2023)

S v Selani (CC13/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 723 (29 July 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

CC13/2023

Judge

Mosopa

The court found that the State proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt on all counts. The evidence of S[...], though a single witness and an accomplice, was corroborated by forensic findings and the accused's own extra-curial statement, which was admitted as having been made freely and voluntarily. The discrepancies in S[...]’s testimony were not material and were reasonably explained by language, cultural, and traumatic factors. The accused's failure to testify in the face of direct evidence further strengthened the State's case. The murders were found to be planned and preme…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Planned Or Premeditated Murder
• Defeating Administration Of Justice
• Single Witness Evidence
• Admissibility Of Statements
• Onus Of Proof

S v Dielele (CC18/2021)

S v Dielele (CC18/2021) [2023] ZANWHC 155 (6 September 2023)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CC18/2021

Judge

S Mfenyana

High Court held that a deceased witness’s statement and related oral hearsay were admissible in the interests of justice under section 3(1)(c).

• Hearsay Evidence
• Law Of Evidence Amendment Act
• Admissibility Of Statements
• Interests Of Justice
• Hearsay-evidence
• Criminal-evidence

S v Ntshaba (57/2022)

S v Ntshaba (57/2022) [2022] ZAECGHC 3 (7 February 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

57/2022

Judge

Govindjee

The court found that all three accused were guilty of murder, acting intentionally and unlawfully in furtherance of a common purpose. The evidence established that accused 3, Faniso, was not compelled by necessity or threat to participate in the murder; her version of compulsion was not reasonably possibly true and contradicted her own prior statement and conduct. The court accepted the testimony of accused 1 and 2, as well as the statement to Captain Klaas, as credible and reliable. The murder was not planned or premeditated, but rather impulsive and executed shortly after the decision was m…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Common Purpose
• Necessity Defence
• Intoxication
• Premeditation
• Admissibility Of Statements

Mbhele and Others v S (25/2019)

Mbhele and Others v S (25/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 260 (25 October 2021)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

25/2019

Judge

Mhlambi

The court granted condonation for a late leave-to-appeal application but dismissed leave to appeal against conviction and sentence.

• Condonation For Late Filing
• Robbery
• Minimum Sentencing
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Admissibility Of Statements
• Criminal-law

Ramaloko and Others v S (A60/2019)

Ramaloko and Others v S (A60/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 686 (3 March 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A60/2019

Judges

M.J Mosopa, M.B Mabunda

The High Court upheld convictions for housebreaking, robbery and murder, admitted warning statements, and reduced an Immigration Act sentence that exceeded the statute.

• Admissibility Of Statements
• Right To Silence
• Minimum Sentencing
• Recent Possession
• Fair Trial Rights
• Criminal-appeal

Maimane v S (A66/2017)

Maimane v S (A66/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 211 (19 October 2017)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A66/2017

Judges

Rampai, Reinders, Hefer

The High Court dismissed an appeal against a rape conviction and life sentence, finding the complainant’s identification reliable and the alibi improbable.

• Rape
• Identification Evidence
• Minimum Sentencing
• Alibi Defence
• Admissibility Of Statements
• Identification-evidence

Zulu v S (CC32/15P)

Zulu v S (CC32/15P) [2016] ZAKZPHC 95 (22 July 2016)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

CC32/15P

Judge

Poyo Dlwati

The High Court convicted the accused of murder and two attempted murders, accepting eyewitness, cellphone, and witness-statement evidence despite excluding one accused statement.

• Murder
• Attempted Murder
• Identification Evidence
• Admissibility Of Statements
• Trial Within A Trial
• Constitutional Right To Silence

Nkwanyana and Others v S (AR765/14)

Nkwanyana and Others v S (AR765/14) [2016] ZAKZPHC 54 (21 June 2016)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR765/14

Judges

Mbatha, Hemraj

The court found that the identification evidence against appellant 1 was unreliable and improperly admitted, as the complainant had seen him in custody before making her statement and no identification parade was held. The statements made by appellant 1 while in police custody were inadmissible, as he was not advised of his constitutional rights. The Uzzi firearm found in appellant 1's possession was defective and incapable of firing ammunition, thus not qualifying as a firearm under the law. The evidence against appellant 2 for possession of a prohibited firearm was credible and supported by…

Source excerpt

• Identification Evidence
• Admissibility Of Statements
• Attempted Murder
• Possession Of Prohibited Firearm
• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances

Zwane v S (700/2015)

Zwane v S (700/2015) [2016] ZASCA 19 (17 March 2016)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

700/2015

Judges

Majiedt, Seriti, Plasket

The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld Zwane’s murder conviction but set aside life imprisonment because the minimum-sentence regime had not been brought to his attention.

• Murder
• Minimum Sentencing
• Identification Evidence
• Admissibility Of Statements
• Single Witness Rule
• Criminal-law

Phume v S (164/14)

Phume v S (164/14) [2015] ZAFSHC 89 (7 May 2015)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

164/14

Judges

C.J. Musi, G.J.M. Wright

On appeal, the court upheld a stock theft conviction and rejected the appellant’s explanation, but set aside a fraud conviction as an improper splitting of charges.

• Stock Theft
• Fraud
• Circumstantial Evidence
• Admissibility Of Statements
• Negative Inference From Silence
• Stock-theft