Case Law[2022] ZAGPPHC 631South Africa
Mofoka v S (A198/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 631 (16 August 2022)
Headnotes
AT FOCHVILLE
Judgment
begin wrapper
begin container
begin header
begin slogan-floater
end slogan-floater
- About SAFLII
About SAFLII
- Databases
Databases
- Search
Search
- Terms of Use
Terms of Use
- RSS Feeds
RSS Feeds
end header
begin main
begin center
# South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
You are here:
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2022
>>
[2022] ZAGPPHC 631
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## Mofoka v S (A198/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 631 (16 August 2022)
Mofoka v S (A198/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 631 (16 August 2022)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2022_631.html
sino date 16 August 2022
# IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
# (GAUTENG
DIVISION, PRETORIA)
(GAUTENG
DIVISION, PRETORIA)
Review
Judgment No:
A198/2022
REPORTABLE:
YES
OF
INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
REVISED
16
AUGUST 2022
In
the matter between
# THABANG
ELIZABETH MOFOKA
THABANG
ELIZABETH MOFOKA
and
# THE
SATE
THE
SATE
REVIEW
JUDGMENT
Van
Wyk AJ
[1]
This is a special review in terms of
section
304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977
submitted
to this Court by the sentencing magistrate.
##
## IN
THE REGIONAL COURT FOR THE REGIONAL DIVISION OF GAUTENG HELD AT
FOCHVILLE
IN
THE REGIONAL COURT FOR THE REGIONAL DIVISION OF GAUTENG HELD AT
FOCHVILLE
SHFS/22
In
the matter between:
## The
State
The
State
And
## Thabang
Elizebeth Mofoka
Thabang
Elizebeth Mofoka
SPECIAL
REVIEW
Accused
was sentenced on 28 June 2022 after she pleaded guilty to both
charges and was found guilty of two counts of contravening
section
305(3)(a)
of the
Children's Act 38 of 2005
namely child neglect.
Both
charges were taken together for the purpose of sentence and accused
was wrongly sentenced to 5 (five) years Correctional supervision
in
terms
section 276(1)(h)
of the
Criminal Procedure Act 51of 1977
.
It
is humbly requested that the sentence be altered to 3 (three) years
Correctional Supervision in terms of
Section 276(1)(h)
of Act 51 of
1977.
The
oversight is regretted.
Adele
Maass
Acting
Regional Magistrate
Fochville
[2]
The matter originates from the lower court where the accused pleaded
guilty in terms of
section 112(2) of
Act 51 of 1977
on two counts of
contravening
section 3Q5(3)(a)_
of
the
Children's
Act, Act
38 of 2005
- child
abuse and/or neglect.
[3]
The charges were taken together for the imposition of sentence and
the following sentence was imposed by the lower court, after
a
pre-sentence report, a Correctional Supervision report and a
Victim-Impact report was submitted:
"In
terms of
section 276(1)(h)
of the CPA 51 of 1977 sentenced to five
(5) years correctional supervision which includes house detention as
well as community
service and taking part in treatment, development
and support programmes as well as mediation and restorative justice."
[4]
The sentencing magistrate in a memorandum attached to the review
record,
requested that the period of correctional supervision is
altered to three (3) years of correctional supervision in terms of
section 276(1)(h)
of Act 51 of 1977.
[5]
Section 305(6) of Act 38 of 2005
provides as follow:
"Subject
to subsection (8), a person convicted of an offence in terms of
subsection (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) is liable to
a fine or to
imprisonment for a period not exceeding ten years, or to both a fine
and such imprisonment."
[6]
The magistrate imposed a _sentence of correctional supervision, which
is provided for in terms of
section
276(3)(b) of Ac;t 51
of
1977:
"Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary in any law contained, other than the
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1997 (Act 105 of
1997), the provisions of
subsection (1) shall not be construed as prohibiting the court from
imposing the punishment referred to
in subsection (1)(h) or (i) in
respect of any offence, whether under the common law or a statutory
provision, irrespective of whether
the law in question provides for
such or any other punishment: Provided that any punishment
contemplated in this paragraph may
not be imposed in any case where
the court is obliged to impose a sentence contemplated in section
51(1) or (2), read with section
52, of the Criminal Law Amendment
Act, 1997."
[7]
Section 276A(1) of Act 51 of 1977
provides as follow:
"Punishment
shall, subject to
the provisions of
section
75
of the
Child
Justice
Act, 2008
, only be imposed under
section 276(1)(h)
-
(a)
after a report of a probation officer or a correctional official has
been placed before the court; and
(b)
for a fixed period not exceeding three years, or in the case of a
conviction for any offence referred to in the
Criminal Law (Sexual
Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act, 2007 (Act 32 of 2007),
for
a
fixed
period not
exceeding
five
years.n
[8]
The magistrate thus exceeded her sentencing jurisdiction with two (2)
years.
[9]
Section 304(4) of Act 51 of 1977
provides as follow:
"If
in any criminal case in which a magistrate's court
has
imposed
a
sentence which is not subject to review in the ordinary course in
terms of section 302 or in which a regional court has imposed
any
sentence, it is brought to the notice of the provincial or local
division having jurisdiction or any judge thereof that the
proceedings in which the sentence was imposed were not in accordance
with justice, such court or judge shall have the same powers
in
respect of such proceedings as if the record thereof had been laid
before such court or judge in terms of section 303
or
this section."
[10]
The sentence imposed in not in accordance with justice as the
magistrate exceeded her sentencing
jurisdiction by two (2) years.
[11]
Section 304(2)(c)(ii) of Act 51 of
1977
sets out the procedure on
review in this particular instance and provides as follow:
"Such
court, whether or not it has heard evidence,
may,
subject to the
provisions
of section 312 confirm, reduce, alter or set aside the sentence
or
any order of the magistrate's court;"
[12]
Subsequently, the sentence imposed by the lower court is set aside
and altered to read
as follow:
ORDER:
"In
terms of section 276(1)(h) of the CPA 51 of 1977 sentenced to three
(3) years correctional supervision which includes house
detention as
well as community service and taking part in treatment, development
and support programmes as well as mediation and
restorative justice."
LA
van Wyk AJ
Acting
Judge of the High Court of South Africa
North
Gauteng Division, Pretoria
I
agree and it is so ordered.
H
De Vos J
Judge
of the High Court of South Africa
North
Gauteng Division, Pretoria
Date
of delivery: 16 August 2022
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
Maphalle v South African Police Service and Others (B38945/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 875 (17 November 2022)
[2022] ZAGPPHC 875High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)99% similar
Mkhwanazi v S (A190/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 862 (7 November 2022)
[2022] ZAGPPHC 862High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)99% similar
Mpongo v S (A256/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 987 (13 December 2022)
[2022] ZAGPPHC 987High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)99% similar
Mokheseng v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans and Others (11458/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 919 (23 November 2022)
[2022] ZAGPPHC 919High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)99% similar
Mabita v S (CC66/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 839 (28 August 2024)
[2024] ZAGPPHC 839High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)99% similar