S v Katile (424/2007) [2008] ZAFSHC 42 (30 April 2008)

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
>>
2008
>>
[2008] ZAFSHC 42
|

|

S v Katile (424/2007) [2008] ZAFSHC 42 (30 April 2008)

IN THE HIGH COURT
OF SOUTH AFRICA
(ORANGE FREE STATE
PROVINCIAL DIVISION)
Case
No.:
424/2007
In the case between:
THE
STATE
and
NTSHEPENG
CLAURINA KATILE
_______________________________________________________
CORAM:
MOCUMIE J
et
FISCHER AJ
______________________________________________________
JUDGEMENT:
MOCUMIE, J
_______________________________________________________
DELIVERED
ON:
30 APRIL 2008
_______________________________________________________
[1] This is a review matter in terms of section 302 read with 304 of
the Criminal Procedure Act of 51 of 1977. (
“the Act”).
The
accused was charged with contravention of section 5(b) the Drug
Trafficking Act 140 of 1992 (“
the Drug Trafficking Act
”).
She pleaded guilty and was convicted as charged. She was sentenced
to 18 months imprisonment which was wholly suspended for
5 years on
certain conditions. In addition the Court imposed R3000,00 or 300
days imprisonment. She was unrepresented.
[2] My Brother
Fisher AJ
directed a query to the
Magistrate which entails the following:
“
Die
beskuldigde is ‘n vonnis van 18 maande gevangenisstraf wat
opgeskort is ,opgele en daarbenewens ook beboet met R3000,00 of
300
dae gevangenisstraf.
1. Kan dit aanvaar
word dat die hoof doel was om die beskuldigde uit die tronk te hou?
2. Tot
welke mate,indien enigsins is die veriestes en beginsinsels soos
vervat in die ondergemelde gesag nagekom?Volle besonderhede
word
verlang aangesien dit uit die oorkonde blyk dat die beskuldigde in
ieder geval tronkstraf sal moet uitdien.Sien in hierdie
verbaand
Sv
Sithole
1997 2 SA 67
(A) te 69G en verder ook
R
v Nhlapo
1954 4 SA 56
(T) te 58G en verder
S
v Zwane
1995 1 SACR 186
(W) te 189a en verder”.
The Magistrate complied and I thank him or her
for the reasons.
[3] Notwithstanding the reasons advanced I am of the view that in
this case the Magistrate overemphasized the interests of the
society
and did not attach sufficient weight to the strong personal
circumstances of the accused. I am therefore entitled to interfere
with the sentence in the manner set out below.
[4] In the circumstances I make the following
order:
4.1 The
conviction of the accused is hereby confirmed.
4.2 The sentence imposed by the Magistrate is set aside and
substituted with the following:
“
The
accused is sentenced to R3000, 00 (three thousand rand) or 24
(twenty four) months imprisonment of which R1500,00 or 12 (twelve)
months imprisonment is suspended for 3 (three) years on condition
that the accused is not convicted of contravention of section
5 (b)
the Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992 committed during the period of
suspension.”
4.3 In terms of
section 282
of the
Criminal Procedure Act 51 of
1977
, the sentence is antedated to 29 January 2008.
___________________

B. C. MOCUMIE, AJ
I concur.
___________________
P.
U. FISCHER, AJ
/em