South Africa Case Law

S v De Kok (186/2012)

S v De Kok (186/2012) [2012] ZAFSHC 173 (18 September 2012)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

186/2012

Judge

J P Daffue

The evidence, including the accused's admissions, clearly established that the accused broke into the premises with the intent to steal. Section 262 of the Criminal Procedure Act permits the court to convict on the specific offence proved by the evidence. It is both legally correct and necessary for the conviction to reflect housebreaking with intent to steal, rather than with intent to commit a crime unknown to the state. The conviction is therefore amended accordingly, and the sentence imposed by the magistrate is confirmed.

Source excerpt

• Housebreaking
• Intent To Steal
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Conviction Amendment

S v Mamabolo (A328/2008)

S v Mamabolo (A328/2008) [2009] ZAGPPHC 298 (2 September 2009)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A328/2008

Judges

B.R. Southwood, G. Webster

On review, the High Court amended a magistrate’s conviction from housebreaking with an unknown intent to housebreaking with intent to steal and attempted theft, and confirmed the sentence.

• Housebreaking
• Attempted Theft
• Conviction Amendment
• Sentencing Review
• Attempted-theft
• Conviction-amendment