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
Moamogoe v S (191/2019) [2020] ZASCA 106; 2021 (1) SACR 121 (SCA) (18 September 2020)
The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against sentence based on a plea and sentence agreement, holding the challenge belonged in review, not appeal.
Shange and Others v S (AR152/2015) [2016] ZAKZPHC 115; [2017] 3 All SA 289 (KZP) (15 December 2016)
The court found that the convictions for theft of motor vehicles (counts 1-4) and possession of firearms and ammunition (counts 27-30) could not be sustained due to lack of direct evidence and failure to prove knowledge or joint possession. The doctrine of common purpose was correctly applied to the primary offences at Charters and Penicuik, as the evidence established a prior agreement among the accused to commit the robberies and associated violent acts. The subsidiary offences, including attempted murder and robbery, were found to be within the scope of the prior agreement, except for cert…
Source excerpt
Mbuyane and Others v S (A445/12) [2015] ZAGPPHC 1105 (13 October 2015)
The High Court upheld robbery and firearm convictions, finding the complainant’s identification reliable and the sentence properly imposed.
Mans v Minister van Korrektiewe Dienste en Andere (2007/17113) [2008] ZAGPHC 22 (30 January 2008)
The court held that the statutory maximum period of detention for an habitual criminal is 15 years, in line with constitutional principles and S v Niemand. Sentences for offences committed before the declaration as habitual criminal and falling within the same generic group (fraud and theft) must terminate at the end of the 15-year period. However, sentences for offences committed after the declaration must run concurrently with the 15-year period, and any balance remaining after 15 years must still be served, subject to parole. The applicant is entitled to remission for information provided,…
Source excerpt
Daly v Road Accodent Fund [2006] ZAFSHC 169; [2006] ZAFSHC 141 (16 February 2006)
The court found that the appellant was not acting under duress or compulsion in any of the offences. The evidence from the complainants established that the appellant played a leading and aggressive role, particularly in the attempted murder and robberies. The appellant's version was improbable and contradicted by the facts, including his failure to escape or report the incidents. The court held that there was no duplication of convictions in counts 2 and 3, as they related to separate acts against different complainants. The application for condonation was granted due to the appellant's yout…
Source excerpt
Explore more
