South Africa Case Law

Mthetwa v S (A262/2018)

Mthetwa v S (A262/2018) [2020] ZAGPPHC 493 (3 September 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A262/2018

Judges

Sardiwalla, Munzhelele

The court found that the sentencing discretion lies with the trial court and that there was no evidence or reasoning before the appeal court to determine that substantial and compelling circumstances existed to justify deviation from the prescribed minimum sentence. The appellant's counsel made submissions in mitigation but did not request a probation officer's report or call witnesses. The appellant's previous convictions for theft and assault, together with the current conviction for robbery, indicated a pattern of criminal behaviour. The court held that even if further mitigation evidence…

Source excerpt

• Sentencing Discretion
• Minimum Sentences
• Mitigating Factors
• Habitual Offender

Williams v S (A118/2015)

Williams v S (A118/2015) [2015] ZAWCHC 179 (27 November 2015)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A118/2015

Judges

Riley, Saldanha

The High Court dismissed an appeal against rape convictions and life imprisonment, upholding the complainant’s credibility and the prescribed minimum sentence.

• Rape Of Minor
• Minimum Sentencing
• Single Witness Evidence
• Victim Impact Reports
• Habitual Offender
• Parole Violation

Mbele v S (A198/2010)

Mbele v S (A198/2010) [2012] ZAFSHC 74 (19 April 2012)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A198/2010

Judges

Van Zyl, R, Van Rooyen, WND R

The Free State High Court dismissed an appeal against rape and attempted rape convictions, finding the complainants credible and the life and 10-year sentences appropriate.

• Rape
• Attempted Rape
• Minimum Sentencing
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Child Witnesses
• Habitual Offender

Hess v S (A319/2007)

Hess v S (A319/2007) [2008] ZAWCHC 171 (11 April 2008)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A319/2007

Judges

Zondi, Louw

The High Court reduced a three-year theft sentence to 16 months, holding the magistrate had overemphasized the appellant’s prior convictions and imposed a disproportionate sentence.

• Sentencing Principles
• Habitual Offender
• Proportionality Of Punishment
• Theft
• Criminal-sentencing
• Sentence-appeal

S v Malan (CA & R 284/03)

S v Malan (CA & R 284/03) [2004] ZANCHC 102 (7 May 2004)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

CA & R 284/03

Judges

P L Goliath, F D Kgomo

Appeal against sentence in a fraud case succeeded. The High Court found 12 years' direct imprisonment excessive and substituted seven years, backdated.

• Fraud
• Sentencing
• Habitual Offender
• Mitigating Factors
• Correctional Services
• Appeal Procedure

Pienaar v S (CA&R 122/02)

Pienaar v S (CA&R 122/02) [2003] ZANCHC 26 (24 February 2003)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

CA&R 122/02

Judges

MAJIEDT R, LACOCK R

The High Court dismissed an appeal against a theft conviction and four-year sentence, holding that the magistrate correctly accepted the State's evidence.

• Theft
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Sentencing Discretion
• Habitual Offender
• Value Of Stolen Property
• Sentencing-discretion

S v Ngcobo and Others (123/86)

S v Ngcobo and Others (123/86) [1986] ZASCA 117 (30 September 1986)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

123/86

Judges

Trengove, Smalberger, Boshoff

Appeal against sentence in a series of armed robbery convictions. The court reduced several lengthy terms and set aside the death sentence, replacing it with 20 years.

• Sentencing Principles
• Aggravating Circumstances
• Death Penalty
• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
• Habitual Offender
• Concurrent Sentences