South Africa Case Law

T.T v S (A180/2020)

T.T v S (A180/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 359 (27 May 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A180/2020

Judges

Phahlane, Teffo

The court found that the appellant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for changing his plea from guilty to not guilty under section 113 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The timing and reasons advanced for the application were unconvincing and did not meet the threshold required by law. The trial court had properly followed the procedures under section 112(2), and the appellant's admissions in his statement were clear and unequivocal. Regarding sentence, the court held that no substantial and compelling circumstances existed to justify deviation from the prescribed minimum sentence of li…

Source excerpt

• Rape Of Minor
• Minimum Sentencing
• Change Of Plea
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Section 112 Statement
• Section 113 Application

S v Mofokeng (19/2012)

S v Mofokeng (19/2012) [2012] ZAFSHC 117; 2013 (1) SACR 143 (FB) (18 June 2012)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

19/2012

Judges

Lekale, Snellenburg

The review court found that the accused, who was unrepresented, was not properly informed of her rights, the procedure under section 112, or the possible competent verdicts. The magistrate failed to ensure that the accused admitted all elements of the charge, and did not conduct an inquiry under section 103 of the Fire Arms Control Act. The accused's answers did not establish the necessary intent for assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm, and the record did not confirm that the complainant, date, and place matched the charge sheet. The cumulative procedural irregularities resulted in…

Source excerpt

• Fair Trial Rights
• Section 112 Procedure
• Section 113 Application
• Firearms Control Inquiry
• Conviction Irregularity

Strauss v S (A47/2008)

Strauss v S (A47/2008) [2008] ZAWCHC 95 (8 August 2008)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A47/2008

Judges

Ndita, Van Heerden

The High Court set aside a theft conviction because the guilty-plea statement did not establish mens rea, and remitted the matter for section 113 compliance.

• Theft
• Mens Rea
• Section 112 Statement
• Section 113 Application
• Criminal-law
• Mens-rea