S v Tladi (96/07) [2007] ZAFSHC 82 (19 April 2007)

45 Reportability
Criminal Law

Brief Summary

Criminal Law — Duplication of convictions — Accused convicted of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm and malicious injury to property — Evidence of assault also supporting conviction for malicious injury — Magistrate concedes splitting of charges and duplication of convictions — Conviction for malicious injury to property set aside, while conviction and sentence for assault confirmed.

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
>>
2007
>>
[2007] ZAFSHC 82
|

|

S v Tladi (96/07) [2007] ZAFSHC 82 (19 April 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT
OF SOUTH AFRICA
(ORANGE
FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION)
Review No. : 96/07
In
the review between:-
THE
STATE
versus
LUCKYBOY
CHARLES TLADI
JUDGMENT
BY:
CILLIé
J
_____________________________________________________
DELIVERED
ON:
19
APRIL 2007
_____________________________________________________
[1] The
accused was convicted on two charges namely assault with the intent
to do grievous bodily harm and malicious injury to property.
[2] The complainant’s
evidence proved that the accused hit her with fists and stones all
over her body. In the process her spectacles
got damaged.
[3] When
the matter was sent for review the reviewing Judge remarked as
follows:
“Was
there not a splitting of charges?”
[4] The magistrate now
concedes that
“
upon
a proper perusal of the court record, and the relevant authorities
... there was indeed a splitting of charges and a subsequent
duplication of convictions. ... this court erred in convicti
ng
more than once on the same culpable fact.”
[5] This
concession of the magistrate is correct. The conviction of malicious
injury to property cannot be proved without relying
on the same
evidence that constitutes the assault. It cannot be sustained.
[6] The
magistrate took the two convictions together for purpose of sentence
and sentenced the accused to twelve months imprisonment,
suspended on
certain conditions. The sentence is appropriate.
For that reason the
conviction on count 2, that is malicious injury to property, is set
aside. The conviction and sentence on count
1 is confirmed.
____________
C.B. CILLIé, J
/sp