South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town Support SAFLII

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town >> 2011 >> [2011] ZAWCHC 517

| Noteup | LawCite

Qulu v S (A89/2011) [2011] ZAWCHC 517 (16 September 2011)

Download original files

PDF format

RTF format


IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

(WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN)

 

CASE NUMBER: A89/2011

DATE:16 September 2011

In the matter between:

 

VUMANI QULU                                                                                            Appellant

 

and

 

THE STATE                                                                                                 Respondent

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

ERASMUS. J:

 

The appellant appeared in the Regional Court at Cape Town on three charges. Het was firstly charged with theft of a motor vehicle and two counts of assault with the intent to do grievous bodily harm.

 

The facts are quite simple in that the complainant parked his motor vehicle at night; at the early hours of the morning his car was seen to be moved down the road. The accused was apprehended. Not only did he steal a car of the complainant, but when he was approached he decided to stab both the complainant and his son. He now only appeals against an effective nine years sentence that was imposed by the Regional Magistrate.

 

The appellant raised the fact that the car was recovered as a mitigating factor, and the cumulative effect of the sentence being of such a nature that it makes it inappropriate. It's instructive to note is that the appellant was sentenced to seven years imprisonment for theft of a motor vehicle in 2003, and that was not his first time either. He should effectively still have been in prison at the time that he committed these offences. If it was not for the complainants on the assault charges that took evasive action, they would have been injured far more seriously.

 

I have had regard to the reasons the Magistrate set out for the sentences imposed. In my view there is no merit in the submissions that the sentences were either shockfully inappropriate and/or that the Magistrate misdirected himself on any of the aspects and consequently I would dismiss the appeal.

 

ERASMUS, J

 

CLOETE, AJ; So ordered, the appeal is dismissed, the sentences are confirmed.

 

CLOETE, AJ