About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
>>
2014
>>
[2014] ZAFSHC 9
|
|
S v Ntshasa (325/2013) [2014] ZAFSHC 9 (30 January 2014)
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
FREE
STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN
Review
No.: 325/2013
In
the matter of:
THE
STATE
v
THABISO NTSHASA
AND
Review
No.: 327/2013
In
the matter of:
THE
STATE
v
MARKUS JEROME ROBINSON
CORAM: RAMPAI, AJP et EBRAHIM, J
JUDGEMENT:
EBRAHIM, J
DELIVERED ON: 30 JANUARY 2014
[1] This matter was placed
before me in terms of
section 304(4)
of the
Criminal Procedure Act,
51 of 1977
by the magistrate Bloemfontein with the following remarks:
“
(1) On 24/10/2013 (case
number 12/1181/13) accused was charged with theft. He was legally
represented by Ms Motsapi of the Legal
Aid Board. Accused pleaded
guilty, the
State then
asked the Court to apply the provisions of
section 112(1)
(a) of Act
51 of 1977. Accused was sentenced as follows:
In
terms of section 297(1)(a) dd of Act 51 of 1977 (submit himself to a
rehabilitation centre). The Magistrate did not conduct an
enquiry in
terms of section 103(2) of the Firearms Control Act 60/2000.
The
passing of sentence was not suspended in terms of section 297(1) (a)
(dd) for a certain period, the accused was only released
on condition
that he submit himself to a rehabilitation centre.
It
is therefore submitted that the proceedings were not in accordance
with Justice.
(2) On 30/10/2013 (case number
12/1215/13) accused was charged with contravening section 4(b) of Act
140 of 1992 Possession of dagga.
He was legally represented by Ms
Motsapi of the Legal Aid Board. Accused pleaded guilty, the State
then asked the Court to apply
the provisions of section 112(1) (a) of
Act 51 of 1977.
Accused was sentenced as
follows:
In terms of section 297(1) (a)
of Act 51 of 1977 passing of sentence postponed for a period of one
year.
The passing of sentence was
postponed in terms of section 279(1 )(a) of Act 51 but the Magistrate
omitted to stipulate the conditions
in terms of section 297(1 )(a)
(i) or 297(1)(a) (ii) of Act 51 of 1977 on which the accused are
released and at what stage he must
appear before the Court again.
It is therefore submitted that the
proceedings were not in accordance with Justice.
The Judge on
review is therefore requested to make the following orders:
a)
Confirm the convictions.
b)
Set aside the imposed sentences.
c)
Remit the records to the Magistrate concerned to impose
competent sentences or make any other orders deemed necessary under
the
circumstances.”
[2] I agree with the learned
magistrate whilst the convictions are in order, the sentences are not
accordingly, the proceedings
not having been conducted in accordance
with Justice, the following order is made:
ORDER
[3] The convictions are
confirmed.
[4] The sentences imposed on
both MARKUS JEROME ROBINSON under Case No 12/1181/13 and THABISO NTS
HAS A under Case No 12/1215/13
are hereby set aside.
[5]
The Records of proceedings in both Case No 12/1181/13 and Case No
12/1215/13 are remitted to the Magistrate Bloemfontein for
sentence
to be imposed afresh.
S. EBRAHIM, J
I concur.
M.
H. RAMPAI, AJP