S v Molefi (1287/2005) [2005] ZAFSHC 142 (3 November 2005)

45 Reportability
Criminal Law

Brief Summary

Criminal Law — Sentencing — Disparity in sentences for similar offences — Accused, an eighteen-year-old first offender, convicted of house breaking with intent to steal and theft, sentenced to 18 months imprisonment — Sentences of co-offenders for similar crime significantly less — Youth and first offender status as strong mitigating factors — Original sentence deemed inappropriate and replaced with 9 months imprisonment.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(ORANGE FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION)
Review No. : 1287/2005
In the review between:­
THE STATE
versus
KEBO STEPHEN MOLEFI
_____________________________________________________
CORAM: HANCKE  J  et  WRIGHT  J
JUDGMENT BY: WRIGHT  J
_____________________________________________________
DELIVERED ON: 3 NOVEMBER 2005
_____________________________________________________
The accused, an eighteen­year old first offender, was found guilty  
of house breaking with intent to steal and theft and sentenced to  
18 (eighteen) months imprisonment.
There   is   no   problem   with   the   conviction   but   reasons   were 
requested with regard to the sentence.  The magistrate replied that  
the complainant in the matter was a target of other house breaking  
incidents and referred to a case in which three youths who were  
also charged and sentenced for house breaking were found guilty  
with regard to the same premises.  These youths were respectively 
seventeen, eighteen and nineteen years old but they were only  
sentenced to 6 (six) months imprisonment each which is much less 
than the sentence in the present case.
In view of the fact that the complainant has now been serving a  
part of his sentence, it will probably serve no purpose to obtain a  
pre­sentencing report.  Nevertheless, the youth of the accused and 
the fact that he was a first offender are very strong mitigating  
factors.  The amount stolen was only approximately R600,00 but  
there was also damage occasioned when the window was broken.  
The fact that the youth has pending charges should not affect the  
severity of this sentence.  
In view of all the circumstances, the sentence is sufficiently 
inappropriate to necessitate alteration thereof.
Accordingly the conviction is confirmed but the sentence is set  
aside and replaced with the following:
2
Nine (9) months imprisonment.
The sentence must be deemed to have been imposed on 15 
September 2005.
_____________
G.F. WRIGHT, J
I agree.
_______________
S.P.B. HANCKE, J
/sp
3