About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal
>>
2006
>>
[2006] ZASCA 20
|
|
S v Heslop (216/05) [2006] ZASCA 20; [2006] SCA 22 (RSA) (20 March 2006)
Case number : 216/05
Not reportable
In
the matter between :
REUBEN
HESLOP APPELLANT
and
THE
STATE RESPONDENT
CORAM : SCOTT, CLOETE, VAN HEERDEN JJA
HEARD : 2 MARCH 2006
DELIVERED : 20 MARCH 2006
Summary: Appeal struck off the roll. Reasons for
delay in transmission of
record
to SCA (9½ years) to be investigated and explanation required
as to
why
heads of argument were delivered on behalf of the appellant when no
power
of attorney had been given to the legal representative who did so.
Neutral citation: This judgment may be referred to as
Heslop v The State
[2006]
SCA 22 (RSA).
_________________________________________________________
JUDGMENT
CLOETE JA
/
CLOETE JA:
[1] This appeal was struck off the roll on 2 March 2006.
The court indicated that a judgment would be handed down in due
course.
[2] The appellant was convicted of three counts of
culpable homicide by Mailula J, sitting with assessors, on 13 August
1996 and sentenced
to an effective term of imprisonment of six years
on 5 November 1996. On the same day that sentence was imposed, leave
to appeal
was sought and granted, without opposition from the State â
which is not surprising, as there are undoubtedly good prospects of
success on appeal.
[3] The appeal record was only received by the registrar
of this court on 19 May 2005. Counsel who represented the State on
appeal
was unable to be of assistance as to the reason for the
inordinate delay of more than nine and a half years. The registrar of
this
court is requested to address a letter to the registrar of the
Johannesburg High Court enclosing a copy of this judgment and
requesting
a full and detailed explanation for the delay which also
identifies the person(s) responsible.
[4] On 25 August 2005 heads of argument were filed on
behalf of the appellant by Adv Miller of the Johannesburg Justice
Centre. The
respondent filed heads of argument on 6 October 2005. The
appeal was set down for hearing on 2 March 2006. A letter dated 1
November
2005 was subsequently sent by the Deputy Director of Public
Prosecutions of the Johannesburg High Court to the President of this
court. The letter reads:
â
Kindly be advised that the Appellantâs Counsel, adv
Miller, has informed this office that he is unable to trace the
whereabouts
of the Appellant and therefore has been unable to obtain
a power of attorney.â
By the time the letter was received, judges had been
assigned to hear the appeal and the records had been distributed.
More importantly,
it was too late for another matter to be set down
for hearing on 2 March of this year. The registrar of this court is
requested to
address a letter to the Johannesburg Justice Centre for
the attention of Adv Miller enclosing a copy of this judgment and
requesting
an explanation as to how that office came to file heads of
argument without a power of attorney from the appellant and further
setting
out what steps have been taken to trace the appellant.
______________
T
D CLOETE
JUDGE
OF APPEAL
Concur: Scott JA
Van Heerden JA