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
Sangweni and Another v S (AR362/22; CCD12/2017) [2025] ZAKZPHC 10 (31 January 2025)
Appeal against murder and robbery convictions succeeded after the court found the confessions inadmissible and the remaining evidence insufficient.
Koka v S (A35/2022) [2024] ZALMPPHC 111 (17 September 2024)
The conviction of the appellant was unsustainable due to several material irregularities. The DNA evidence excluded the appellant as the source of semen found on the complainant, and the prosecution failed to link any of the forensic analyst's scenarios to the appellant. The complainant's identification of the appellant in court was procedurally flawed, amounting to dock identification without proper foundation and with undue prompting by the prosecution. The trial was expedited without awaiting vital DNA results, prejudicing the appellant's right to a fair trial. The evidence of penetration…
Source excerpt
Molopo v S (A57/23) [2024] ZAGPPHC 641 (21 June 2024)
The High Court dismissed an appeal against conviction, holding that witness identification was reliable despite the absence of an identification parade.
Masango and Another v S (203/2022) [2024] ZASCA 98 (14 June 2024)
The SCA dismissed leave to appeal applications in a robbery case, holding that the appellants showed no reasonable prospects of success on conviction or sentence.
Ndlovu v S (A150/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 941 (1 December 2022)
The court found that the complainant was a credible witness who had sufficient opportunity to observe the appellant during the robbery in broad daylight and at close proximity. The identification was corroborated by objective evidence, including the recovery of the red hoodie and blood-stained knife. The identity parade was properly conducted, and the complainant's dock identification further strengthened the reliability of the identification. The appellant failed to present any evidence supporting his alibi, and the contradictions regarding the missing fingers were immaterial in light of the…
Source excerpt
Mkhize v S (CA&R20/2022) [2022] ZANCHC 55 (4 October 2022)
The High Court upheld an appeal against a rape conviction, finding the State failed to prove identity and guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Tshandu v S (A248/21) [2022] ZAWCHC 123 (14 June 2022)
The High Court upheld the appeal against a robbery conviction, finding the dock identification unreliable and the circumstantial evidence insufficient.
Mahlangu and Another v S (A13 /2020) [2021] ZAMPMHC 24 (23 September 2021)
The court found that the confession made by the second appellant to the Investigating Officer, a Warrant Officer, was inadmissible as he was not a commissioned officer and no trial-within-a-trial was held to determine voluntariness. The identification of the cell phone recovered from the second appellant was not sufficiently reliable, as the complainant failed to provide unique identifiers and his recollection was inconsistent. The second appellant provided a reasonable explanation for possession of the cell phone, negating the doctrine of recent possession. The dock identification of the fir…
Source excerpt
Tafeni and Another v S (A 07/21) [2021] ZAWCHC 289 (17 June 2021)
The court found that the identification evidence presented by the State was unreliable and insufficient to prove the appellants' guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The main eyewitnesses, Kama and Kobeni, gave conflicting accounts regarding which appellant was identified at the scene, and there was no corroborating evidence about the clothing worn by the appellants at the time of the robbery. The dock identification by da Silva was given little weight, as it was not supported by other evidence. The court emphasized that the onus rests on the State to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the pr…
Source excerpt
Zwane v S (A203/19) [2020] ZAGPPHC 344 (31 July 2020)
The High Court dismissed an appeal against a housebreaking and theft conviction, upholding identification evidence and the magistrate’s use of section 186.
Explore more
