South Africa Case Law

Dremus v S (A563/2011, A341/14)

Dremus v S (A563/2011, A341/14) [2014] ZAGPPHC 833 (16 October 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A563/2011, A341/14

Judges

E M Kubushi, A M L Phatudi

The trial court erred in failing to properly consider the appellant's moral blameworthiness and personal circumstances, and in not adequately considering correctional supervision as a sentencing option. The cases relied upon by the trial court involved a higher degree of negligence and moral blameworthiness than the present case. The appellant, a first offender and former police officer, was found suitable for correctional supervision by the correctional officer's report. The appellate court held that, in the circumstances, correctional supervision under section 276(1)(h) of the Criminal Proc…

Source excerpt

• Culpable Homicide
• Sentencing Discretion
• Correctional Supervision
• Moral Blameworthiness

S v Rautenbach (164/2012)

S v Rautenbach (164/2012) [2013] ZAGPJHC 105 (28 March 2013)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

164/2012

Judge

Vally

The court found no substantial and compelling circumstances to justify a departure from the minimum sentence for murder. The accused's claim of diminished moral blameworthiness due to intoxication was rejected, as there was no evidence of substantial impairment at the time of the offence. The accused's actions immediately after the murder demonstrated clear intent and rational decision-making. The theft, though involving items of negligible value, was committed with callous disregard for the deceased and warranted a severe sentence. The sentences for unlawful possession of a firearm and ammun…

Source excerpt

• Minimum Sentencing
• Moral Blameworthiness
• Intoxication
• Concurrent Sentences
• Firearm Licensing
• Time Spent Awaiting Trial

S v Bosman (102/89)

S v Bosman (102/89) [1989] ZASCA 101; [1990] 1 All SA 289 (A) (11 September 1989)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

102/89

Judges

J J F Hefer, Joubert, Nestadt

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court was correct in finding that there were no mitigating circumstances warranting a lesser sentence. The appellant's psychopathic personality traits and unhappy youth did not substantially influence his conduct on the day of the murder, which was calculated and controlled rather than impulsive. His youthfulness was not a contributing factor, as he acted independently and with full awareness of the wrongfulness of his actions. The trial court's evaluation of the appellant's moral blameworthiness, considering the motive and the gruesome nature o…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Mitigating Circumstances
• Psychopathic Personality
• Youthfulness
• Moral Blameworthiness

S v Lesetla and Another (8/88)

S v Lesetla and Another (8/88) [1989] ZASCA 50 (31 March 1989)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

8/88

Judges

Hoexter, Steyn, F.H. Grosskopf

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court's finding of no extenuating circumstances was reasonable and justified by the evidence. The appellants' confessions and statements, corroborated by other evidence, established their active participation in the murder and robbery. The court found that the intention to kill was clearly formed, either at the outset or during the attack, and that the appellants' conduct was brutal and deliberate. The trial judge considered the appellants' lack of intelligence, education, and primitive background but correctly concluded that these factors did n…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Common Purpose
• Extenuating Circumstances
• Admissibility Of Confessions
• Sentencing
• Moral Blameworthiness

S v Matsuib (372/1989)

S v Matsuib (372/1989) [1989] ZASCA 2 (28 February 1989)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

372/1989

Judges

Botha, Hefer, Eksteen

The court dismissed an appeal against a death sentence, holding that psychological evidence did not establish mitigating circumstances for murder.

• Mitigating Circumstances
• Murder Sentencing
• Expert Psychological Evidence
• Moral Blameworthiness
• Murder-sentencing
• Mitigating-circumstances

S v Kosztur (401/87)

S v Kosztur (401/87) [1988] ZASCA 59 (25 May 1988)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

401/87

Judges

Van Heerden, Smalberger, Steyn

Appeal against a death sentence was dismissed after the court found no extenuating circumstances despite psychopathy, drug use, and a troubled background.

• Murder
• Extenuating Circumstances
• Psychopathy
• Drug Influence
• Moral Blameworthiness
• Extenuating-circumstances

S v McBride (40/88)

S v McBride (40/88) [1988] ZASCA 40 (30 March 1988)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

40/88

Judges

Corbett, Viljoen, Hefer, Grosskopf, Vivier

The court upheld a murder conviction appeal ruling that no extenuating circumstances existed, finding no misdirection in considering the crime's nature and victims.

• Extenuating Circumstances
• Murder
• Internal Security Act
• Political Motive
• Moral Blameworthiness
• Extenuating-circumstances

S v Mzinyane and Others (137/87)

S v Mzinyane and Others (137/87) [1987] ZASCA 136 (26 November 1987)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

137/87

Judges

Jacobs, Corbett, Joubert

The court dismissed three murder appeals, holding that youth, intoxication and alleged influence did not amount to extenuating circumstances.

• Extenuating Circumstances
• Murder Sentencing
• Moral Blameworthiness
• Youth As Mitigation
• Extenuating-circumstances
• Murder-sentencing

S v Ngidi and Another (139/87)

S v Ngidi and Another (139/87) [1987] ZASCA 138 (26 November 1987)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

139/87

Judges

Rabie, Hefer, Boshoff

The court dismissed an appeal against a finding of no extenuating circumstances for the murder of a 14-year-old victim, holding the trial court properly distinguished the counts.

• Murder
• Extenuating Circumstances
• Common Purpose
• Sentencing
• Moral Blameworthiness
• Extenuating-circumstances

S v Makatu (135/87)

S v Makatu (135/87) [1987] ZASCA 134 (24 November 1987)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

135/87

Judges

Jacobs, Smalberger, Steyn

The appeal against a murder sentence was dismissed. The court upheld the finding that no mitigating circumstances existed and confirmed the mandatory death sentence.

• Murder
• Mitigating Circumstances
• Burden Of Proof
• Sentencing
• Moral Blameworthiness
• Mitigating-circumstances