South Africa Case Law

Sekwae v S (CA 47/2023)

Sekwae v S (CA 47/2023) [2024] ZANWHC 172 (10 July 2024)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CA 47/2023

Judges

Hendricks, Petersen

The appeal was upheld because the trial court materially misdirected itself by relying on admissions made under section 220 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which were shown to be erroneous and not properly explained to the appellant. The identification evidence was unreliable, as the key witness's contemporaneous statement contradicted his later dock identification, and the arresting officer could not confirm the appellant as the person found in possession of the firearm. The State failed to prove the chain of custody and ballistic linkage between the firearm and the spent cartridges beyond re…

Source excerpt

• Admissions In Criminal Procedure
• Identification Evidence
• Firearms Control Act
• Fair Trial Rights
• Section 220 Admissions

Director of Public Prosecutions: Gauteng Division, Pretoria v Hamisi (895/17)

Director of Public Prosecutions: Gauteng Division, Pretoria v Hamisi (895/17) [2018] ZASCA 61; 2018 (2) SACR 230 (SCA) (21 May 2018)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

895/17

Judges

Lewis, Dambuza, Rogers

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that where an accused, in a written guilty plea under s 112(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, admits all elements of the offence, including the age of the complainant, the State is not required to lead further oral evidence to prove those elements. The respondent's admission of the complainant's age was sufficient for conviction and sentencing. The High Court erred in setting aside the conviction and reducing the sentence based on a perceived lack of evidence of age. However, considering the respondent's personal circumstances, the absence of a pre-sentencing…

Source excerpt

• Guilty Plea Procedure
• Rape Of Minor
• Minimum Sentencing
• Admissions In Criminal Procedure
• Proof Of Elements

S v Cloete (239/93)

S v Cloete (239/93) [1994] ZASCA 13; [1994] 4 All SA 151 (A) (17 March 1994)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

239/93

Judges

E M Grosskopf, Eksteen, Nienaber

The court held that a section 115 plea explanation must be weighed as a whole, including exculpatory parts. The appellant’s intoxication and coercion claims failed.

• Common Purpose
• Admissions In Criminal Procedure
• Section 115 Explanation Of Plea
• Onus Of Proof
• Intoxication
• Accessory After The Fact