About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2012
>>
[2012] ZAGPPHC 372
|
|
Ndlovu v S (A329/2011) [2012] ZAGPPHC 372 (31 July 2012)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)
CASE NO: A329/2011
DATE: 31 July 2012
In the matter between
BRENDAN SOLLY
NDLOVU
................................................................................................
Applicant
And
THE
STATE
...........................................................................................................................
Respondent
JUDGMENT (LEAVE TO
APPEAL)
BAM J:
The applicant Solly Brendan Ndlovu applies for leave to appeal
against his conviction on a charge of rape and the life sentence
which was imposed by the Regional court confirmed on appeal by this
Court.
The judgment of the Magistrate is quite clear. I have perused it
again and I have also perused the judgment of this court handed
down
by Sapphire AJ in which I concurred.
I am of the opinion that pertaining to any prospects that another
court may interfere with the conviction, that no such prospects
exist
and accordingly the application for leave to appeal against the
conviction should be refused.
Regarding the issue of the sentence it is so that the complainant
was seriously injured by the applicant in this matter, and the
fact
that the Magistrate did not find any circumstances justifying a
lesser sentence than the life sentence imposed.
My Brother Sapphire AJ and I agreed in that regard. Today it was
however conceded by the State, represented by Advocate Scheepers,
that there may be prospects that another court may interfere with the
life sentence.
After having considered all the issues I am of the opinion that
reasonable prospects exist that another Court may interfere with
the
sentence. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the
sentence of life imprisonment should therefore be granted
to the
appellant.
POTTERILL J:
I agree and it is so ordered.
COURT ADJOURNED