Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
S v JEK (CA & R 26/2023) [2023] ZANCHC 45 (28 July 2023)
The High Court set aside a child offender’s conviction and 8-month compulsory residence sentence, finding the guilty plea procedure and record were not in accordance with justice.
Walters and Another v S (A83/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 918 (24 November 2022)
The court held that the reference to section 51(2) in the charge sheet did not preclude the application of section 51(1) for sentencing purposes. The appellants were charged with murder committed in the furtherance of a common purpose, which falls under Part I of Schedule 2 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and attracts the minimum sentence of life imprisonment. The magistrate properly informed the appellants of the sentencing risks before their plea, and their constitutional rights to a fair trial were not breached. The sentencing regime is determined by the proven elements of the offence, n…
Source excerpt
Kausi v S (A103/2019) [2019] ZAGPJHC 511 (18 November 2019)
The court found that the appellant's statements in his guilty plea were clear, deliberate, and demonstrated full awareness of the unlawful nature of his conduct. The references to alcohol consumption in the probation officer's report did not provide any factual basis to doubt the validity of the guilty plea or require further investigation by the magistrate. The gravity and planned nature of the rape of a four-year-old child, coupled with the absence of substantial and compelling circumstances, justified the sentence of life imprisonment. The magistrate did not err in either conviction or sen…
Source excerpt
S v Gumede and Others (DR21-DR 27/2019; AR133-AR139/2019; 23/16418/2018; 23/16416/2018; 23/18980/2018; 23/18920/2018; 23/20327/2018; 23/21990/2018; 23/984/2019; 47/2018; 45/2018;49/2018; 50/2018; 51/2018; 01/2019; 02/2019) [2019] ZAKZPHC 70; 2020 (1) SACR 644 (KZP) (1 November 2019)
The court held that section 112(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not restricted by the nature of the offence but by the magistrate's opinion regarding the appropriate sentence. Where the likely sentence falls below the statutory threshold, and the accused is represented, the magistrate may exercise discretion to convict on a plea of guilty alone. The presumption of competence of legal representatives protects the accused's rights, and section 113 provides a further safeguard against wrongful conviction. The court rejected the argument that shoplifting is categorically excluded from sect…
Source excerpt
S v Ryk (CA & R 49/2019) [2019] ZANCHC 35 (30 August 2019)
Special-review judgment on whether a guilty plea should have stood after psychiatric evidence raised doubt about the accused’s capacity to follow proceedings.
Ntlemeza v S (R129/19) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1090 (15 August 2019)
High Court review confirming a guilty plea conviction for driving with excessive blood alcohol, but remitting the licence-suspension issue for reconsideration.
Sebaka v S (A82/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 196 (22 May 2019)
The court found that the appellant's admission was sufficient to satisfy the elements required for conviction under section 36 of the General Law Amendment Act. The appellant admitted knowing the goods were stolen and could not provide a satisfactory explanation for their possession. The inclusion of the statement regarding reasonable suspicion did not render the plea defective, as the appellant's own admissions established the necessary elements. The conviction was therefore upheld.
Source excerpt
S v Sisir (R238/2018) [2018] ZAFSHC 211 (24 December 2018)
On special review, the High Court held that the magistrate should have applied section 113 of the Criminal Procedure Act before sentence and remitted the matter.
S v Molefe; S v Goodman (R346-2018; R348-2018) [2018] ZAFSHC 217 (24 December 2018)
On special review, the High Court set aside a theft conviction and sentence entered under section 112(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act, holding the procedure was inappropriate for a serious common-law offence.
S v Mantakana (13/2018) [2018] ZAECBHC 7 (12 July 2018)
The magistrate failed to elicit the necessary admissions from the accused to sustain a conviction under section 65(1)(a) of the National Road Traffic Act. Specifically, there was no evidence or admission that the accused's driving ability was impaired by alcohol. The questioning focused on the blood alcohol concentration, which is relevant to the alternative charge under section 65(2)(a), but not to the main count. The absence of proper questioning regarding impairment constitutes a procedural irregularity. Consequently, the conviction and sentence cannot stand and must be set aside. The matt…
Source excerpt
Explore more
