Oguh v The State (A151/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 220 (18 July 2025)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
A151/2023
Judges
Daniso, Van Rhyn
High Court criminal appeal on identification evidence and alibi defence. The conviction for robbery with aggravating circumstances was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
Nzima v S (Appeal) (A132/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 483 (19 May 2025)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A132/2023
Judges
N V Khumalo, M M D Lenyai, G N Moshoana
The High Court dismissed Nzima’s appeal against conviction for murder and related offences, holding that the accomplice evidence was reliable and corroborated.
Gilchrist v S (1153/2021) [2025] ZASCA 57 (12 May 2025)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
1153/2021
Judges
Zondi, Schippers, Hughes, Phatshoane, Modiba
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court complied with s 93ter(1) of the Magistrates’ Court Act, as the record reflected that the appellant’s legal representative confirmed no assessors were required. The appellant was legally represented throughout, and there was no indication he was uninformed of his rights. The application to introduce new evidence based on a recanting affidavit was refused, as the affidavit lacked independent corroboration and was not probably true or reliable. The identification evidence was detailed, corroborated, and the appellant himself conceded that the…
Mthethwa v S (Appeal) (AR8/2021) [2025] ZAKZPHC 44 (7 May 2025)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Case number
AR8/2021
Judges
Henriques, Harrison
Appeal against murder and firearm convictions dismissed. The High Court upheld the trial court’s findings on assessors, identification evidence, alibi, and sentence.
Mabena and Another v S (A297/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 409 (23 April 2025)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A297/2023
Judges
PD Phahlane, M Munzhelele
The High Court dismissed an appeal against conviction and sentence for robbery with aggravating circumstances, rejecting the appellants’ alibi and sentencing challenges.
Mohale v S (Appeal) (A12/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 71 (14 April 2025)
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Case number
A12/2024
Judges
Kganyago, Pillay
The High Court dismissed a rape appeal, upholding conviction and life sentence after finding the complainant’s identification credible and the alibi improbable.
Payne v S (Appeal) (CA&R 182/2023) [2025] ZAECMKHC 35 (8 April 2025)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda
Case number
CA&R182/2023
Judges
N G Beshe, P Zilwa
The appeal court found that the trial magistrate, despite not providing in-depth reasons, had thoroughly considered the evidence and was conversant with the applicable onus of proof and the need for caution in identification evidence. The complainant's evidence was found to be clear and satisfactory in all material respects, and her identification of the appellant was credible. The appellant's alibi was not reasonably possibly true, as corroborated by the circumstances and the presence of both accused together. The court held that there were no material contradictions in the state's case and…
Tsimatsima v S (A185/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 20 (28 January 2025)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
A185/2023
Judges
Naidoo, Nemavhidi
The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against conviction and 15-year sentence for housebreaking with intent to rob and robbery with aggravating circumstances.
Lesetla v S (A66/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 366 (14 November 2024)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
A66/2024
Judges
Reinders, Nemavhidi
The court found the complainant's evidence to be trustworthy, consistent, and corroborated by medical and aliunde evidence, despite her young age and the absence of other direct witnesses. The appellant's alibi was raised late, not put to witnesses, and lacked credibility. The trial court correctly applied the principles governing single witness evidence and the double cautionary rule, as well as the statutory prohibition against treating sexual offence complainant evidence with undue caution. No substantial and compelling circumstances existed to justify deviation from the prescribed minimum…