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
>>
2011
>>
[2011] ZAFSHC 4
|
|
S v Duze (618/2010) [2011] ZAFSHC 4 (6 January 2011)
VRYSTAATSE HOË
HOF, BLOEMFONTEIN
REPUBLIEK VAN
SUID-AFRIKA
Hersiening Nr. : 618/2010
In die hersiening
tussen:-
DIE STAAT
versus
MALIBONGWE DUZE
_____________________________________________________
UITSPRAAK DEUR:
WRIGHT, R
_____________________________________________________
GELEWER OP:
6 JANUARIE 2011
_____________________________________________________
[1] ‘n Skrywe is
ontvang vanaf die streekshoflanddros te Welkom gedateer 13 Desember
2010 wat soos volg lui:
“
1. Attached
hereto please find the transcribed record of the abovementioned
Regional Court Case.
2. Attached also please find comments
by the preciding acting Regional Magistrate, Mr. Rampersad.
3. It is my respectful submission that
the sentence imposed is vague and confusing. Apart thereof the
sentence had apparently been
altered by the preciding officer as set
out in his comments.
4. Although the accused had been found
guilty of attempted murder as charged, after he pleaded guilty, there
is no indication that
he in fact intended to murder the complainant,
but only admitted that he had the intention to injure the
complainant.
5. It is submitted that the oversight
could be attributed to a lack of experience on the part of the
preciding officer.
6. After consultation with the
Regional Court President, Mr Lalbahadur, it was suggested that the
matter be brought to the attention
of a Judge of the Free State High
Court, for possible intervention in terms of the provisions of
section 304(4) of the Criminal
Procedure Act, act 51 of 1977.
7. It is therefor respectfully
suggested that the conviction and sentence be set aside and that the
matter be referred back for
a
de novo
trial before
another preciding officer.”
[2] Dit is duidelik uit
die bestudering van die stukke en spesifiek die beskuldigde se pleit
dat hy nie skuldig gepleit het aan
poging tot moord, waaraan hy
skuldig bevind is, en dat die skuldigbevinding om dié rede
alleen tersyde gestel moet word.
Dit sal uiter aard tot gevolg hê
dat die vonnis ook tersyde gestel moet word,
[3] Bygevolg word die
skuldigbevinding en vonnis ooreenkomstig die bepalings van artikel
304(4) van Wet 51 van 1977 tersyde gestel
en word daar gelas dat die
saak terugverwys word na die betrokke hof vir ‘n verhoor
de
novo
voor ‘n ander voorsittende beampte.
______________
G.F. WRIGHT, R
/sp