Pieterse v S (A332/2016)
Pieterse v S (A332/2016) [2017] ZAGPJHC 103 (22 March 2017)
The court found that the appellant was properly warned of the minimum sentencing provisions and that the conviction was safe, with no failure of justice apparent. The evidence did not support a finding of premeditation or dolus directus; rather, the conduct was impulsive and consistent with dolus eventualis. The magistrate's inference regarding the nature of the wound was unpersuasive and unsupported by evidence. The appellant's age (20 years), two years spent in custody awaiting trial, and his employment and family responsibilities constituted substantial and compelling circumstances justify…
Source excerpt
- Minimum Sentencing
- Dolus Eventualis
- Premeditation
- Appeal Procedure
- Intoxication In Sentencing