South Africa: Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

You are here:
SAFLII >>
Databases >>
South Africa: Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown >>
2015 >>
[2015] ZAECGHC 112
| Noteup
| LawCite
Ncubeni v S (CA14/2014) [2015] ZAECGHC 112 (29 May 2015)
Download original files |
NOT REPORTABLE/ REPORTABLE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN)
Case No: CA 14/2014
In the matter between:
SIVUYILE NCUBENI Appellant
And
THE STATE Respondent
Coram: Chetty J, Plasket J and Revelas J
Heard: 25 May 2015
Delivered: 29 May 2015
Summary: Appeal - Against sentence - Whether appellant's personal circumstances constitute substantial and compelling circumstances - Sentence clearly not unjust - Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT
CHETTY J: -
[1] The appellant, with the requisite leave granted by the trial court, appeals against the statutorily ordained sentences of life and fifteen years imprisonment imposed upon him, pursuant to the provisions of s 51 (2) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act [1] , consequent upon his conviction on charges of murder and robbery with aggravating circumstances respectively. In granting the appellant leave to appeal against the sentences imposed, the trial court concluded that another court "may find that the applicant's personal circumstances accumulatively taken amount to substantial and compelling circumstances warranting a departure from the prescribed sentences."
[2] In his address on sentence the appellant's counsel detailed those personal circumstances as - the appellant was twenty seven years of age; unmarried but the father of a two year old child who resided with his mother; he had received rudimentary education, having dropped out of school whilst in standard two; his working life consisted mostly of casual work, ferrying sand on his father's tractor ; that he was a first offender and the product of a deprived upbringing with the concomitant lack of meaningful opportunities.
[3] The appellant's personal circumstances are not unique. Millions of our citizenry find themselves in a similar, if not worse position. In my judgment , personal circumstances, per se, do not rank as substantial and compelling circumstances as envisaged by s 51 (2). Malgas [2] emphasized that ultimately, the question for determination by the sentencing court is whether , in balancing the mitigating and aggravating factors , the circumstances of the case, cumulatively regarded, render the ordained sentence unjust and call for a departure therefrom. The answer, in casu, was a resounding no. In my judgment , the appellant's personal circumstances are not decisive and must give sway. The enormity of the crime, the premeditativeness inherent in the modus operandi of visiting the isolated farm under the false pretext of seeking employment, biding his time to ensure that no-one would witness his dastardly deed, and, finally, brutally executing the deceased, far outweigh any charitable interpretation of whatever mitigatory factors there may have been. The circumstances attendant upon the murder of the deceased imperatively called for the imposition of the prescribed sentences. In the result the following order will issue: -
The appeal is dismissed.
_________________________
D. CHETTY
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
Plasket J
I agree.
_________________________
C.PLASKET
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
Revelas J
I agree.
_________________________
E. REVELAS
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
Oba the Appellant: Adv E Crouse
Legal Aid South Africa , Port Elizabeth
Tel: (041) 408 2800
Obo the Respondent: Ad G.G Tuner
Director of Public Prosecutions, Grahamstown
Tel: (046) 603 200
[1] Act No,105 of 1997
[2] 2001 (2) SA 1222 (SCA) at para (18].