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
Vumani Oscar Ntuli v S (1025/2022) [2023] ZASCA 150 (10 November 2023)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the magistrate misdirected himself by not considering pre-sentence custody when imposing sentence, and granted leave to appeal against sentence.
S v Mogadi [2023] ZAGPPHC 429; A213/2022 (6 June 2023)
The High Court dismissed an appeal against a life sentence for murder, holding that no substantial and compelling circumstances justified departure from the prescribed sentence.
Willemse v S (A 80 / 2021) [2021] ZAWCHC 92; 2022 (1) SACR 43 (WCC) (11 May 2021)
Sentence appeal in a housebreaking and theft case: the High Court upheld the sentence on count 1 but altered count 2 to run half concurrently.
Maphana and Another v S (174/2017) [2018] ZASCA 8 (1 March 2018)
The Supreme Court of Appeal refused leave on conviction but found the appellants had prospects of success on sentence because pre-trial detention was not considered.
Ndengezi v S (876/2017) [2017] ZASCA 174 (1 December 2017)
The Supreme Court of Appeal set aside theft convictions wrongly based on common purpose and reduced the remaining sentence to 27 years after considering pre-trial detention.
Zulu v S (226/2016) [2016] ZASCA 207 (21 December 2016)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that leave to appeal against sentence should have been granted because the trial court overlooked the single criminal enterprise and pre-trial custody.
Mahlangu v S (A651/13) [2016] ZAGPPHC 754 (26 August 2016)
The appeal was limited to sentence only. The court found that the trial magistrate did not misdirect himself in imposing the minimum sentence of 15 years for robbery with aggravating circumstances, as the evidence established aggravating factors and the appellant's previous convictions. The period spent in custody awaiting trial was considered but did not outweigh the aggravating circumstances, and the delays were not attributable to the prosecution. However, the imposition of the maximum sentence for rape was not justified, as the reconstructed record did not provide sufficient reasons for e…
Source excerpt
Masuku v S (A381/2014) [2015] ZAGPPHC 248 (30 April 2015)
The appeal court found that the trial court correctly imposed the minimum prescribed sentences for the offences, as no substantial or compelling circumstances were present to justify deviation. The appellant's personal circumstances, including age, unemployment, lack of dependents, and time spent in custody awaiting trial, were considered but did not outweigh the aggravating factors such as the seriousness of the offences, use of a dangerous weapon, lack of remorse, and previous convictions. The trial court properly exercised its discretion, sufficiently considered the cumulative effect of th…
Source excerpt
Mnisi v S (A136/2012) [2014] ZAGPJHC 38 (20 February 2014)
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to interfere with the conviction, as leave to appeal was granted only in respect of sentence and the review powers under section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act do not apply to appeals considered by petition. The court found no substantial and compelling circumstances to reduce the prescribed sentence for robbery with aggravating circumstances, but determined that the trial court erred by not taking into account the 10 months of pre-sentencing detention. Accordingly, the sentence of 15 years' imprisonment was upheld, but the period of 10 months…
Source excerpt
Explore more
