Sibeko v S (A420/2007) [2008] ZAWCHC 132 (1 February 2008)

55 Reportability
Criminal Law

Brief Summary

Criminal Law — Sentencing — Cumulative effect of sentences — Appellant sentenced to three years' imprisonment for housebreaking and theft while serving another sentence for similar offence — Appeal against sentence on grounds of misdirection regarding cumulative effect — Court finds magistrate did not misdirect but reduces effective sentence by ordering part of the new sentence to run concurrently with the existing sentence.

About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
>>
2008
>>
[2008] ZAWCHC 132
|

|

Sibeko v S (A420/2007) [2008] ZAWCHC 132 (1 February 2008)

IN THE HIGH COURT
OF SOUTH AFRICA
(CAPE OF GOOD HOPE
PROVINCIAL DIVISIONS
CASE
NO
:
A420/2007
DATE
:
1 FEBRUARY 2008
In the matter between:
TWICE
SIBEKO
Appellant
and
THE
STATE
Respondent
JUDGMENT
MOTALA.
J
:
[1] The appellant was
charged in the Magistrate's Court with housebreaking with intent to
steal and the theft of two bicycles valued
at R2 000. He pleaded
guilty and was found guilty. The offence was committed on 19
September 2006. On 13 March 2007 he was sentenced
to three years'
imprisonment. He appeals against the sentence only.
[2] At the time the
appellant was sentenced he was serving a sentence of three years'
imprisonment for housebreaking which was imposed
on 30 October 2006,
that is about six weeks after he committed the present offence. It
is, accordingly, unclear whether or not
the sentence imposed on him
on 30 October 2006 has had a deterrent effect on the appellant.
[3] Appellant's counsel
has submitted that the magistrate misdirected himself in not taking
into account the cumulative effect of
the sentences.
In his reasons for
sentence the magistrate states that he did so and accordingly, I do
not think he has misdirected himself in that
or any other respect.
However, there is a
substantial disparity between the effective sentence I would have
imposed and the effective sentence imposed
by the magistrate. In my
view, although a sentence of three years' imprisonment was, in the
light of the appellant's record an
appropriate sentence, one half of
that sentence should run concurrently with the sentence he was
already serving.
[4]    I
would accordingly:
(a)
Uphold the appeal against the sentence.
B
Set  side  the  sentence   and
substitute  the following therefor:
"The accused is
sentenced to three years' imprisonment, 18 months of which shall run
concurrently with the sentence of three
years' imprisonment imposed
on 30 October 2006.
BOZALEK,
J
: I agree.
BOZALEK, J
MOTALA. J: It is so
ordered.
MOTALA, J