Lorenzi v S (A130/21) [2024] ZAWCHC 229; 2025 (1) SACR 421 (WCC) (29 August 2024)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
A130/21
Judge
Lekhuleni
High Court appeal against refusal of bail pending reconsideration of leave to appeal was dismissed. The court held the appellant had not shown that bail was in the interests of justice.
S v Matodzi (Sentence) (CC34/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 746 (10 July 2024)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
CC34/2024
Judge
Mosopa
The High Court sentenced Tshifhiwa Calvin Matodzi to 15 years’ imprisonment in a VBS-related fraud matter, accepting a plea and sentence agreement and declining a firearm disqualification.
Imran v S (A112/2023) [2023] ZAWCHC 320 (7 November 2023)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
A112/2023
Judge
Andrews AJ
The High Court dismissed an appeal against refusal of bail, finding the magistrate had not misdirected herself and that the interests of justice did not permit release.
S v Porrit and Another (SS 40/2006) [2022] ZAGPJHC 661 (11 August 2022)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
SS 40/2006
Judge
Spilg
The court finds that both accused have made their intention clear to embark on protracted cross-examination of Ramsay, mirroring their previous conduct with other witnesses. The court is empowered under section 166(3)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act to impose reasonable limits on cross-examination to prevent undue delay. The accused's right to a fair trial is not absolute and must be balanced against the interests of justice and the efficient conduct of proceedings. The documentary evidence is central to the prosecution's case, and excessive questioning on credibility alone is not justified.…
Molefe and Others v S (A02/2021) [2021] ZAGPJHC 408 (3 September 2021)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
A02/2021
Judges
Senyatsi ML, Siwendu T
The appeal court found no misdirection by the trial court in imposing an eight-year custodial sentence for six counts of theft involving substantial sums stolen from the Department of Justice and Correctional Services. The trial court had properly considered the appellant's personal circumstances, the recommendations of the probation and correctional supervision officers, and the gravity of the offence. The appellant showed no genuine remorse and failed to take accountability for his actions. Given the prevalence of white-collar crime and the need for deterrence and retribution, the sentence…
Mogobatlou v S (A208/2017) [2019] ZAGPJHC 446 (25 October 2019)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
A208/2017
Judges
L R Adams, B Ceylon
The High Court dismissed an appeal against conviction and 15-year sentence for theft of R5.26 million from ATMs, finding the appellant’s version improbable and the confession admissible.
Kwenda v S (682/2018) [2019] ZASCA 113 (17 September 2019)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
682/2018
Judges
Maya, Zondi, Mokgohloa, Dolamo, Hughes
The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against refusal of leave to appeal a criminal sentence for fraud, finding no reasonable prospects of success.
Nxele v S (A76/2017) [2017] ZAGPJHC 249 (12 September 2017)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
A76/2017
Judges
R. Francis, I. Opperman
The appeal court found that the sentence imposed by the trial court was disproportionate, particularly the 15-year sentence on count 36 for theft marginally exceeding R500,000, compared to the sentence for the remaining 82 counts totaling over R8 million. The court held that all counts should be considered together for sentencing purposes. The appellant's drug dependency, while a contributing factor, did not justify a significant reduction in sentence. The trial court failed to properly balance mitigating and aggravating factors, resulting in a sentence that was disturbingly inappropriate. Th…
Broodryk v S (959/2016) [2017] ZASCA 62 (29 May 2017)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
959/2016
Judges
Tshiqi, Saldulker, Zondi, Van Der Merwe, Schippers
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court had properly considered all relevant factors, including the appellant's personal circumstances, the aggravating effect of her previous conviction, and the interests of society. The appellant committed theft while under a suspended sentence for a similar offence, demonstrating a lack of remorse and disregard for the deterrent effect of her prior conviction. The sentence of five years' imprisonment was not shockingly inappropriate, and the trial court was justified in discounting alternative sentencing options. The appeal against sentence wa…