South Africa Case Law

S v Sehloho (R82/2020)

S v Sehloho (R82/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 123 (15 April 2021)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

R82/2020

Judges

Mhlambi, Nekosie

The accused admitted knowing the goods were stolen and intended to benefit from their storage, satisfying the dishonesty element of section 36 of the General Law Amendment Act. His legal representation and confirmation of the section 112(2) statement rendered the admissions sufficient. The conviction is confirmed. The sentence is amended to reference the statutory provision, correcting the vague condition. The order declaring the accused unfit to possess a firearm under section 103(1) of the Firearms Control Act is set aside, as the magistrate failed to conduct the required enquiry under sect…

Source excerpt

• Possession Of Suspected Stolen Property
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 304
• Firearms Control Act Section 103
• Dishonesty Offences

Du Plessis v S (A41/2017, 14/458/2013)

Du Plessis v S (A41/2017, 14/458/2013) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1082 (7 June 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A41/2017, 14/458/2013

Judges

T Brenner, R Tolmay

The High Court dismissed an appeal against a four-year effective sentence for theft, finding the appellant's dishonesty, recidivism, and lack of remorse aggravating.

• Theft
• Sentencing
• Recidivism
• Dishonesty Offences
• Dishonesty

Mofome and Another v S (CA53/2015)

Mofome and Another v S (CA53/2015) [2017] ZANWHC 19 (19 May 2017)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CA53/2015

Judges

R D Hendricks, T J Djaje

The court found that the sentences imposed by the Regional Court were shockingly severe and disproportionate to the crime committed. The trial court failed to give sufficient weight to the appellants' personal circumstances, particularly the advanced age and professional consequences for the first appellant. The court held that the moral blameworthiness of the appellants differed, with the first appellant, an attorney, being the mastermind and the second appellant, a layperson, executing the plan. The court determined that a custodial sentence was appropriate for both appellants but that diff…

Source excerpt

• Fraud
• Sentencing Principles
• Correctional Supervision
• Dishonesty Offences

Ramokolo v S (251/10)

Ramokolo v S (251/10) [2011] ZASCA 77 (26 May 2011)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

251/10

Judges

Ponnan, Maya, Petse

The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld Bruce Ramokolo’s conviction for extortion, but confirmed a revised custodial sentence with a clarified suspension condition.

• Extortion
• Sentencing Principles
• Dishonesty Offences
• Adverse Inference
• Single Witness Evidence
• Criminal-sentencing

Feyen v S (A60/2008)

Feyen v S (A60/2008) [2008] ZAWCHC 16 (5 March 2008)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A60/2008

Judge

Webster AJ

Appeal against refusal of bail dismissed where the accused faced a real flight risk and failed to show the interests of justice permitted release.

• Bail Application
• Flight Risk
• Propensity To Commit Offence
• Onus Of Proof
• Extradition
• Dishonesty Offences

S v Moseki (18/06)

S v Moseki (18/06) [2006] ZANWHC 21 (16 March 2006)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

18/06

Judges

R D Hendricks, A A Landman

On automatic review, the High Court confirmed conviction for tendering counterfeit currency, but set aside a five-year sentence as above the magistrate’s sentencing jurisdiction.

• Counterfeit Currency
• Magistrates Court Jurisdiction
• Sentencing Limits
• Dishonesty Offences
• Magistrates-court-jurisdiction
• Sentencing-limits

S v Silo (1555/2004)

S v Silo (1555/2004) [2004] ZAFSHC 94 (21 October 2004)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

1555/2004

Judges

HANCKE R, KRUGER R

On review, the High Court reduced the practical severity of a theft sentence, suspending half of 36 months' imprisonment and correcting a firearm-disqualification reference.

• Sentencing
• Suspended Sentence
• Dishonesty Offences
• Firearms Disqualification
• Suspended-sentence
• Dishonesty-offences

Kote v S (A354/2002)

Kote v S (A354/2002) [2002] ZAWCHC 77 (13 September 2002)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A354/2002

Judges

Motala, Williams

Appeal against conviction and sentence for theft of a motor vehicle dismissed. The court upheld reliance on recent possession and confirmed a seven-year sentence.

• Theft
• Recent Possession Doctrine
• Sentencing Discretion
• Dishonesty Offences
• Recent-possession
• Sentencing-discretion