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
Makamu v S (A145/2019) [2020] ZAGPJHC 54 (26 February 2020)
Appeal against sentence for two attempted murder convictions. The High Court found the trial court should have ordered concurrent sentences, reducing the effective term to five years.
Diseko and Others v S (124/16) [2016] ZANCHC 66 (29 November 2016)
The court found that the magistrate erred by failing to consider the emotional stress and anxiety raised by the appellants as new facts in the third bail application. The cumulative effect of lengthy incarceration, uncertainty regarding the commencement of trial, deprivation of liberty, and uncontested evidence of emotional distress and anxiety constituted exceptional circumstances under section 60(11)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The court held that these factors justified the release of the appellants on bail, subject to appropriate conditions to minimize any risk of absconding. The ap…
Source excerpt
Khoabane v S (A25/2011) [2015] ZAFSHC 212 (15 October 2015)
The court held that the period spent by the appellant in custody awaiting trial was properly considered by the trial court as one of several factors relevant to sentencing. However, the aggravating circumstances of the offence, including the severity of the assault, repeated violence, psychological trauma to the complainant, and the appellant's role as the driver and principal actor, far outweighed the mitigating factors. The prescribed minimum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment for robbery with aggravating circumstances was not disproportionate or unjust in the circumstances. The approach of…
Source excerpt
Ramele v S (83/13) [2013] ZAGPPHC 327 (12 November 2013)
The appellate court found that the trial court had properly considered the appellant's personal circumstances, including his age, education, family situation, and status as a first offender. The court held that the absence of a pre-sentence report did not amount to a misdirection, as the relevant facts were placed before the trial court during mitigation. The court further held that the time spent in custody awaiting trial should not be mechanically deducted from the sentence, in line with established precedent. The sentence imposed was not found to be unduly harsh or shockingly inappropriate…
Source excerpt
Vuswa Fleet Services (Pty) Ltd v Wet Hersteldienste BK h/a Nelspruit Truck & Tractor en Ander (25150/2011) [2012] ZAGPPHC 327 (30 November 2012)
The High Court dismissed an appeal against a 12-year sentence for three counts of housebreaking, finding no misdirection and no basis for interference.
Mnisi and Another v S (A704/2011) [2012] ZAGPPHC 183 (21 August 2012)
The High Court dismissed two appellants’ challenge to rape convictions and 15-year sentences, but ordered that four years of pre-trial detention be deducted from sentence expiry.
S v Seruoe (99/2011) [2011] ZAFSHC 68 (24 March 2011)
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
Explore more
