South Africa Case Law

S v Nhlanhla (SS03/2023)

S v Nhlanhla (SS03/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 547 (23 May 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

SS03/2023

Judge

Kumalo

The court found that the accused's conduct was premeditated and that he was aware of his actions at the time of the offence. The accused made repeated threats, acted purposefully, and uttered incriminating statements during the commission of the crime. The evidence of intoxication was insufficient to establish a lack of criminal capacity, as the accused demonstrated awareness and intent throughout the day. The defence of temporary non-pathological incapacity was rejected, and the accused's claim of amnesia was contradicted by eyewitness testimony and his own conduct. The State discharged its…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Criminal Capacity
• Non Pathological Incapacity
• Intoxication
• Onus Of Proof
• Premeditation

S v Abrahams (32/92)

S v Abrahams (32/92) [1993] ZASCA 127 (20 September 1993)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

32/92

Judges

Hefer, Kannemeyer, Howie

The court dismissed an appeal against a murder conviction, rejecting a non-pathological incapacity defence and upholding a five-year sentence.

• Murder
• Criminal Responsibility
• Non Pathological Incapacity
• Provocation
• Sentencing
• Intent

S v Kalogoropoulos (85/1990)

S v Kalogoropoulos (85/1990) [1992] ZASCA 235; [1993] 1 All SA 472 (A) (30 November 1992)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

85/1990

Judges

Botha, Eksteen, Van den Heever

The court rejected a defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity based on alcohol and emotional stress, and upheld convictions and sentences.

• Criminal Capacity
• Non Pathological Incapacity
• Culpable Homicide
• Murder
• Common Assault
• Sentencing Principles