S v Dibakwane (A935/14)
S v Dibakwane (A935/14) [2015] ZAGPPHC 19 (8 January 2015)
The evidence did not establish that the accused unlawfully and intentionally broke into Lucky Madonsela's premises in count 1, as the accused found the door already open and broken. The State failed to prove housebreaking beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused only admitted to theft. Accordingly, the conviction for housebreaking with intent to steal and theft in count 1 was set aside and replaced with a conviction for theft. The sentence for count 2, which was correctional supervision for eighteen months, was confirmed as appropriate. The sentence for count 1 was remitted to the magistrate…
Source excerpt
- Housebreaking
- Theft
- Correctional Supervision
- Section 304 Review
- Sentencing Variation