South Africa: North West High Court, Mafikeng Support SAFLII

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: North West High Court, Mafikeng >> 2003 >> [2003] ZANWHC 23

| Noteup | LawCite

S v Mmolotsi (66/2003) [2003] ZANWHC 23 (8 May 2003)

Download original files

PDF format

RTF format


CA NO. 66/2003



IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

(BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION)



In the matter between:



THE STATE


VS


PAULINE MMOLOTSI



REVIEW JUDGMENT



HENDRICKS AJ:


This is a review which came before me. The accused Pauline Mmolotsi, was charged in the District Court, Madikwe with theft of a cellular phone worth approximately R700.00. She was convicted by the learned magistrate and was sentenced as follows:


“R3000-00 or 12 months imprisonment of which R1500-00 or 6 months imprisonment is suspended for a period of 5 years on condition that accused is not again found guilty of theft or an offence of which theft is a competent verdict committed during period of suspension”

I am of the view that the conviction of the accused is in order. Having read the record I think that the sentence imposed is severe under the circumstances.


In mitigation of sentence, the accused stated inter alia that she “do odd jobs at Martins Funerals and earns R500-00 per fortnite.


The Learned Magistrate also found that accused is not married but has a minor child of three years of age; and she was treated as a first offender because no previous convictions were proven by the state.


It furthermore seems that the learned magistrate was inclined to keep her out of prison because he enquired from the accused as to how is she going to pay the fine.


Having regard to all the mitigating circumstances of this case, the interest of society and the seriousness of the offence I am of the view that the sentence imposed should be substituted.


In the circumstances the conviction is confirmed. The sentence is set aside and the following substituted therefor:-


“R1500-00 or 6 months imprisonment, half of which is suspended for a period of three (3) years on condition that the accused is not convicted of theft committed during the period of suspension”.





R.D. HENDRICKS

ACTING JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT



I agree






B.E. NKABINDE

JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT


DATED: 08 MAY 2003