South Africa Case Law

Solo v S (A167/2015)

Solo v S (A167/2015) [2016] ZAFSHC 32 (3 March 2016)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A167/2015

Judges

Van Zyl, Bokwa

The appellate court found that the trial court had properly considered all relevant factors, including the seriousness of the crime, the appellant's personal circumstances, and the interests of society. The trial court applied the triad principles of sentencing and the Minimum Sentence Act, and correctly found that there were no substantial and compelling circumstances to justify deviation from the prescribed minimum sentence. The appellant's conduct was unprovoked, involved multiple stabbings, and showed no remorse. The sentence imposed was neither shocking nor inappropriate, and the trial c…

Source excerpt

• Sentencing Principles
• Minimum Sentences
• Appeal Against Sentence
• Individualization Of Sentence

Vukile v S (A366/11)

Vukile v S (A366/11) [2015] ZAGPPHC 275 (19 February 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A366/11

Judges

Maumela, JJ. Strijdom

The trial court failed to inform the appellant of the applicability of the minimum sentencing regime under section 51(2) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which constitutes a procedural irregularity affecting only the sentence and not the conviction. The appellate court, having all relevant facts before it, is competent to reconsider the sentence afresh outside the minimum sentencing regime. The offences committed are serious and involved violence against unarmed victims, but there is no evidence of premeditation. The appellant was 19 years old at the time of arrest and had previous convicti…

Source excerpt

• Minimum Sentencing
• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
• Procedural Irregularity
• Right To Fair Trial
• Individualization Of Sentence

Chauke v S (A824/13)

Chauke v S (A824/13) [2014] ZAGPPHC 74 (28 February 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A824/13

Judges

DM Thulare, TJ Raulinga

The High Court upheld an appeal against a life sentence for rape, finding the sentence insufficiently individualized and substituting 20 years’ imprisonment.

• Rape
• Sentencing Principles
• Individualization Of Sentence
• Rehabilitation
• Life Imprisonment
• Appeal Upheld

Chauke v S (A824/13)

Chauke v S (A824/13) [2014] ZAGPPHC 48 (28 February 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A824/13

Judges

DM Thulare, TJ Raulinga

The High Court reduced a life sentence for rape to 20 years after finding the sentencing court failed to properly individualize the offender’s circumstances.

• Rape
• Sentencing Principles
• Individualization Of Sentence
• Rehabilitation
• Previous Convictions
• Criminal-sentencing