S v Goche (CA 88 of 2019; HMT 18 of 2020) [2020] ZWMTHC 18 (27 February 2020)

S v Goche (CA 88 of 2019; HMT 18 of 2020) [2020] ZWMTHC 18 (27 February 2020)

The conviction for reckless driving was not supported by the evidence and was substituted with a conviction for dangerous driving under s 52(2) of the Road Traffic Act. The sentence of 2 years imprisonment was set aside and replaced with a fine or, in default, imprisonment, and a driving prohibition for 2 years.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] ZWMTHC 18
Parties
Appellant: Irimai Goche; Respondent: The State
Court
Mutare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Case Number
CA 88 of 2019 ; HMT 18 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence varied
Legal Topics
Reckless Driving, Dangerous Driving, Sentencing, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Traffic Law Reckless Driving Dangerous Driving Sentencing Appeal Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Irimai Goche

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for reckless driving was proper
  2. 2 Appropriate sentence for dangerous driving

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction for reckless driving was not supported by the evidence and was substituted with a conviction for dangerous driving under s 52(2) of the Road Traffic Act. The sentence of 2 years imprisonment was set aside and replaced with a fine or, in default, imprisonment, and a driving prohibition for 2 years.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence varied

Orders

  • Both appeals against conviction and sentence are upheld.
  • Appellant found guilty of contravening s 52(2) of the Road Traffic Act (dangerous driving).