South Africa Case Law

Pooe v S (A753/15)

Pooe v S (A753/15) [2016] ZAGPPHC 1202 (29 November 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A753/15

Judges

E.M. Kubushi, H.F. Jacobs

The trial court misdirected itself by not ordering the sentences for housebreaking and conspiracy to commit robbery to run concurrently, given that both offences were committed at the same place and time and were closely linked. The cumulative effect of the sentences was unduly harsh. The appellate court is therefore entitled to interfere and order the sentences to run concurrently, resulting in an effective eight-year imprisonment. Furthermore, the sentence imposed under section 120(4) of the Children's Act was not justified, as the appellant was not convicted of any offence listed in that s…

Source excerpt

• Sentencing Principles
• Concurrent Sentences
• Misdirection In Sentencing
• Children's Act Section 120
• Antedating Of Sentence

Kgwedi and Others S (A898/2013)

Kgwedi and Others S (A898/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 995 (6 November 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A898/2013

Judges

Msimeki, Potterill, Tuchten

High Court correction of sentence in a criminal appeal. The court corrected the sentencing date, confirmed certain counts, and varied sentences on counts 1, 3 and 4.

• Sentencing Misdirection
• Appeal Against Sentence
• Concurrent Sentences
• Antedating Of Sentence
• Criminal-sentencing
• Criminal-appeal

Moremoholo v S (577/2013)

Moremoholo v S (577/2013) [2014] ZAGPJHC 443 (25 April 2014)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

577/2013

Judges

B Mahalelo, L Windell

The High Court dismissed an appeal against sentence but ordered the Parole Board to consider the appellant’s parole application within 60 days.

• Sentencing Discretion
• Antedating Of Sentence
• Parole Eligibility
• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
• Sentencing-discretion
• Antedating-of-sentence

Khalo v S (KS 56/00)

Khalo v S (KS 56/00) [2013] ZANCHC 38 (8 November 2013)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

KS 56/00

Judges

Olivier, Phatshoane

The application for reconsideration of sentence and non-parole recommendation is dismissed because the High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain such an application after the applicant has exhausted all appeal remedies. The Full Bench did not impose a binding non-parole period but merely made a non-binding recommendation regarding parole eligibility, which does not restrict the executive's discretion. The applicant's request to antedate his sentence to the date of arrest is not supported by the Criminal Procedure Act, which only allows antedating to the date of original sentence and only in…

Source excerpt

• Sentencing
• Non Parole Recommendation
• Antedating Of Sentence
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Parole Eligibility

Kgatlhane v Minister of Correctional Services and Others (2595/10)

Kgatlhane v Minister of Correctional Services and Others (2595/10) [2011] ZANWHC 50 (1 September 2011)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

2595/10

Judge

A A Landman

The court dismissed an urgent bid for immediate release, holding that the resentencing ran from the date imposed and could not be backdated by this court.

• Sentencing
• Antedating Of Sentence
• Parole Eligibility
• Correctional Services Act
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Parole-eligibility

S v Seruoe (99/2011)

S v Seruoe (99/2011) [2011] ZAFSHC 68 (24 March 2011)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

99/2011

Judges

L.J. Lekale, K.J. Moloi

The court held that section 282 of the Criminal Procedure Act does not empower trial courts to antedate sentences. Instead, if the interests of justice require, the sentencing court may deduct the period spent in custody from the sentence it considers appropriate. The trial magistrate erred in antedating the sentence. Furthermore, the court observed that the record did not show that the required enquiry under section 103(2)(a) of the Firearms Control Act was conducted before declaring the accused fit to possess a firearm. Such an enquiry is mandatory and must be conducted in all applicable ca…

Source excerpt

• Antedating Of Sentence
• Awaiting Trial Detention
• Firearms Control Act Enquiry
• Sentencing Principles

S v Sekgobela (A1244/2006)

S v Sekgobela (A1244/2006) [2008] ZAGPHC 89 (14 March 2008)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

A1244/2006

Judges

Seriti, Raulinga

The High Court reduced rape and assault sentences, finding youth, first-offender status, and lack of serious injury were substantial and compelling circumstances.

• Rape Sentencing
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Minimum Sentences
• Youth As Mitigation
• First Offender
• Antedating Of Sentence