SIMPHIWE MABHUTI SONTSHANTSHA JUDGMENT
|
|
- Easter Crawford
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE: MTHATHA In the matter between CASE NO:121/08 THE STATE and SIMPHIWE MABHUTI SONTSHANTSHA Accused JUDGMENT PAKADE J: Background [1] The accused is charged with the murder of his stepfather by stabbing him with a knife with intent to kill him. The offence is alleged to have been committed at Pola Park area within the outskirts of the District of Mthatha. [2] Upon arraignment the accused pleaded not guilty to the charge of murder. Mr Gabavana, Counsel for the accused, confirmed the plea and raised self defence as the defence of the accused but did not
2 outline it. It is clear therefore, in my view, that by raising self defence, the accused was placing himself at the scene of crime and is thus admitting actus reus. All that remains is for the accused to put the details of his defence to the state witnesses under cross examination before confirming them in his evidence (President of the RSA v South African Rugby Football Union 2000(1) SA 1 (CC)). State Case [3] The State handed up the following documentary exhibits with the consent of the accused and his counsel, namely, section 220 admissions which embody the post mortem report. These are marked exhibit A and B respectively, in the record. [4] As depicted in the post mortem report, the chief post mortem finding is that the deceased sustained a cut on the left subclavion artery and left carotid artery. As a result of these injuries plus minus 2500 mls of liquid blood was found in the left pleural cavity. The cause of death is thoracic injuries caused by a sharp instrument. [5] It is apposite to state right from the outset that the State has a duty to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and that an accused person does not have any duty to prove his innocence. Once the State has made up a prima facie case as at the closure of its case, it is only then that an accused person may testify in his defence. Before that he has a duty to cross-examine every state witness that testifies against him. In order to secure a conviction the State must show that the defence 2
3 raised is false beyond a reasonable doubt while at the same time showing that it has proved the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. At the same time the Court need not reject the state case in order to acquit the accused but must be satisfied that the defence version is reasonably probably true. The accused must establish his defence on a balance of probability, namely, his explanation must raise a defence valid in law which is reasonably probably true. [6] I must now consider if the state has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt or the accused has raised a valid defence which entitles him to an acquittal. [7] The State relied on the evidence of two witnesses, Mrs Nomvano Mbovane (Nomvano) and Mrs Zukiswa Mhlawuli (Zukiswa). Nomvano does not provide direct evidence implicating the accused with the stabbing of the deceased. The essence of her evidence is that she saw the accused carrying a knife after he had had a meeting with the deceased in the passage of the shop while the latter was running away from the spot of the meeting. The deceased then fell down and bled on the chest while the accused proceeded to the direction of the shop building. It emerges from her evidence further that the accused and the deceased shared accommodation together with accused`s mother and the accused. In 2004 the deceased killed accused`s mother by stabbing her. Nomvano did not testify that the two were quarrelling when she first saw them in the passage. The cross examination of Nomvano by Counsel for the defence did not have any 3
4 direct substantial impact on her. In fact, only two questions which were not even relevant were asked to the witness. Her testimony is corroborated by the accused`s defence which places him at the scene where the stabbing of the deceased occurred which then makes it common cause between the state and the defence that a knife was indeed used in the scene of crime. [8] Zukiswa is the cousin of the accused. On the 22 April 2007 the accused visited her in her place of work and reported to her that he had stabbed the deceased. He then told her the circumstances under which the stabbing occurred. The deceased found him sitting with his friends in a shop and requested to talk to him outside. They both went outside with the accused following the deceased. When they were walking, the deceased drew out a knife and wanted to stab him. The accused pushed him and the knife fell off the deceased`s hand. The accused picked it up and stabbed the deceased. [9] This piece of evidence was not challenged, as it should have been if it was disputed by the accused. This principle of cross examination which emanates from English law in Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R67 (HL) was reaffirmed by the Constitutional Court in President of SA v South African Rugby Football Union referred to at paragraph [2] above. The Court said in paragraph [61] page 36: The institution of cross examination not only constitutes a right, it also imposes certain obligations. As a general rule it is essential, when it is intended to suggest that a witness is not speaking the truth on a particular 4
5 point, to direct the witness`s attention to the fact by questions put in cross examination showing that the imputation is intended to be made and to afford the witness an opportunity, while still in the witness box, of giving any explanation open to the witness and of defending his or her character. If a point in dispute is left unchallenged in cross-examination, the party calling the witness is entitled to assume that the unchallenged witness`s testimony is accepted as correct. This rule was enunciated by the House of Lords in Brown v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 (HL). The learned Justices of the Constitutional Court put further clarity on the principle in paragraph [63] at page 37 of the judgment: The precise nature of the imputation should be made clear to the witness so that it can be met and destroyed, particularly where the imputation relies upon inferences to be drawn from other evidence in the proceedings. It should be made clear not only that the evidence is to be challenged but also how it is to be challenged. This is so because the witness must be given an opportunity to deny the challenge, to call corroborative evidence, to qualify the evidence given by the witness or others and to explain contradictions on which reliance is to be placed. [10] The rule is, however, not inflexible. It is not necessary to cross examine on the point if it is clear that prior notice has been given to the witness that his honesty is being impeached or that such intention is otherwise manifest. [11] The evidence of Zukiswa turned out to be the only one implicating the accused and on which the prosecution relies as an informal admission of the stabbing of the deceased. Obviously on hindsight and on realising 5
6 the negative effect of this piece of evidence on him, the accused disavowed it in his evidence and gave a different version. His version of the events is that deceased called him to a passage. He asked if he had cooked at home and upon the accused answering in the affirmative, the deceased went home to eat. Deceased came back and called him again to the same passage. He asked for his cellular phone. The accused offered to give him another one at a later stage as the one that was in his possession belonged to his girlfriend. The deceased drew out a knife and opened it. The accused, believing that he was attacking him, then grabbed deceased`s hand which was holding the knife and a struggle ensued over the possession of the knife. The accused overpowered the deceased who got stabbed in that process and the knife fell down. The deceased ran away and the accused picked up the knife and went to the shop to show it to his friends. [12] It was only the accused and the deceased in the passage. The accused is the only person left to give credible evidence of how the deceased sustained the two fatal injuries on the chest region. The nature and the position of the wounds in the deceased`s chest are inconsistent of having been inflicted in the course of the struggle over the possession of the knife. The plausible indication is that they were inflicted one after the other but certainly not at the same time. On the infliction of the first wound in self defence there could have been no need to inflict the second one as the deceased could have been rendered powerless and ineffective by the first one. The inference is therefore irresistible that both wounds were inflicted intentionally when the deceased was powerless and defenceless. 6
7 The version he gave on this point is not reasonably possibly true. His demeanour had the hallmark of a lying witness and this makes it impossible for me to accept his evidence. He did not answer honestly, satisfactorily, clearly and candidly questions which were put to him by the state counsel. He has contradicted himself in many ways. On the contradictory versions of the accused and Zukiswa it is prudent to accept the more probable version. [13] The evidence of Zukiswa was not only unchallenged but the version of the accused was not put to her. The accused had a duty to introduce his defence by putting it to state witnesses who gave evidence in the trial especially Zukiswa who implicated him. As the accused was legally represented by an experienced advocate of this Court and not appearing in person I have, without hesitation, to accept the unchallenged evidence of Zukiswa that the accused visited her in her workplace and told her that the knife fell in the course of a struggle between him and the deceased and that he picked it up and stabbed the deceased on the chest. That version is more probable than that of the accused. There is nothing in the evidence of Zukiswa that the accused told her that he was against the wall when he stabbed the deceased. He could not have said so because he had told her that he was following the deceased. This is an informal admission of the stabbing after the knife fell from the struggle between the two. The only irresistible inference from this admission is that the stabbing took place when the deceased was no longer posing an imminent danger to the accused as the knife had fallen down. That the accused was able to pick the knife up is an 7
8 indication that it fell on a spot which was convenient for him to pick it up uninterrupted by the deceased. He had an opportunity to run away after picking the knife up. The law of self defence prefers that a person should run away rather than to kill. If he prefers to kill when he has such an opportunity then he is guilty of murder. [14] Having considered all the facts of this case I find that the state has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The defence of self defence raised by the accused is rejected as palpably false beyond a reasonable doubt. I find instead that the accused has exceeded the reasonable bounds of self defence and has thus become the aggressor. Verdict The accused is found guilty of Murder. L. P. Pakade JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT Counsel for the State: Counsel for the Accused: Adv Nxumalo Adv Gabavana Matter Heard on: 2, 3, 4 August 2010 Judgment delivered: 6 August
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 8 OF 2005 BETWEEN: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS Appellant AND ISRAEL HERNANDEZ ORELLANO Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice Mottley
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION THE STATE DHAMESH RAYMOND
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE 2 nd June 2009 CRIMINAL JURISDICTION THE STATE Vs DHAMESH RAYMOND Mr. Ganesh Heera, State Counsel, for the State. Ms. K. Kyte-John for the defence.
More informationREPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK
REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA REPORTABLE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK Case No: CC 12/2011 In the matter between: THE STATE versus ABRAHAM ALFEUS Neutral citation: S v Alfeus (CC 16/2011) [2013]
More informationHIGH COURT (BISHO) JUDGMENT ~~ 1. The indictment sets out two charges against the accused. The first charge is
HIGH COURT (BISHO) CASE No. CC13/2000 THE STATE versus INGA BONIWE Accused JUDGMENT ~~ EBRAHIM J: 1. The indictment sets out two charges against the accused. The first charge is that 'on or about the15th
More informationCRIMINAL LAW: CASES. Charges of assault occasioning bodily harm and unlawful wounding
CRIMINAL LAW: CASES WEEK 1: INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL LAW Personal Freedom, Morality and the Criminal Law 3.36C CASE: R V BROWN [1994] HOUSE OF LORDS Facts of the Case Appellants belonged to a group of
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT: ASSAM: NAGALAND: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Criminal Appeal No. 357of 2013 Sri Rabindra Das Appellant -Versus- The State of Assam Respondent -BEFORE- HON
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO WARREN COUNTY. : O P I N I O N - vs - 7/15/2013 :
[Cite as State v. Hobbs, 2013-Ohio-3089.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO WARREN COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2012-11-117 : O P I N I O N - vs - 7/15/2013
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT ATHENS COUNTY
[Cite as State v. Smith, 2008-Ohio-2061.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT ATHENS COUNTY State of Ohio, : : Plaintiff-Appellee, : Case No. 07CA15 : v. : DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY
More informationMTSHENGISENI MABASA...ACCUSED
NOT REPORTABLE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT (JOHANNESBURG) CASE NO: 65/2011 DPP REF NO: JPV2011/0045 DATE:17/11/2011 In the matter between THE STATE and MTSHENGISENI MABASA...ACCUSED Criminal law trial indictment
More informationLAW 525 CANADIAN CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE. Section 1 Professor Russo TOTAL MARKS: 100
LAW 525, Section 1 PAGE 1/6 Write Your Exam Code Here: Return this exam question paper to your invigilator at the end of the exam before you leave the classroom. THIS EXAMINATION CONSISTS OF SIX (6) PAGES
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA
On review from a committal to stand trial on a charge of second degree murder by a preliminary inquiry judge dated September 13, 2017. Date: 20180302 Docket: CR 17-01-36388 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as:
More informationCr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 136 of 2000(R)
1 Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 136 of 2000(R) Against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.3.2000 and 31.3.2000 respectively passed by 2 nd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in S.T. No.
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs May 13, 2008
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs May 13, 2008 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. MARILYN DENISE AVINGER Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 2005-B-1239
More informationExamination of witnesses
Examination of witnesses Rules and procedures in the courtroom for eliciting (getting information) from witnesses Most evidence in our legal system is verbal. A person conveying their views and beliefs,
More informationSTATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 11-95
DO NOT PUBLISH STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS DEXTER O NEIL MAYES STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 11-95 APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF ST. LANDRY, NO. 09-K-1075
More informationv No Ingham Circuit Court I. FACTS
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED March 29, 2018 v No. 336025 Ingham Circuit Court BRYANT MARTIN COLLIER, LC No.
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 8, 2015. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D14-2675 Lower Tribunal No. 13-26651 Eduardo Viera, Petitioner,
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 19, 2006 v No. 261895 Wayne Circuit Court NATHAN CHRISTOPHER HUGHES, LC No. 04-011325-01 Defendant-Appellant.
More informationS16A0255. EDWARDS v. THE STATE. Phirronnius Edwards was tried by a Colquitt County jury and convicted
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: May 9, 2016 S16A0255. EDWARDS v. THE STATE. BLACKWELL, Justice. Phirronnius Edwards was tried by a Colquitt County jury and convicted of murder and the unlawful
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 15 of 2009
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2011 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 15 of 2009 BETWEEN: THE QUEEN Appellant AND ALBERT GARBUTT JR. Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr Justice Sosa President The Hon. Mr Justice
More informationNOT DESIGNATED for PUBLICATION. STATE Of LOUISIANA. COURT Of APPEAL. first CIRCUIT 2007 KA 0885 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS JESSICA KELLY
NOT DESIGNATED for PUBLICATION STATE Of LOUISIANA COURT Of APPEAL first CIRCUIT 2007 KA 0885 n V I f STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS JESSICA KELLY On Appeal from the 19th Judicial District Court Parish of East
More informationREVIEW JUDGMENT DELIVERED : 1 NOVEMBER 2002
Republic of South Africa REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (CAPE OF GOOD HOPE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) HIGH COURT REF No : 1907/2002 CASE No : D 122/2002 Magistrate s Series No : 171/2002 In the
More informationEnglish 1301/ Angry Men Test
Ware 1 English 1301/1302 12 Angry Men Test Name This is an open book test. You may use the text of the play and your notes. You will need a scantron and use the bluebook from before with short answer questions.
More informationNOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 115,650 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. JOHN BALBIRNIE, Appellant, STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 115,650 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS JOHN BALBIRNIE, Appellant, v. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee. MEMORANDUM OPINION 2017. Affirmed. Appeal from Franklin
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) ) DIVISION ONE Respondent, ) ) No. 66331-3-I v. ) ) UNPUBLISHED OPINION EDWARD EARL COBB, ) ) Appellant. ) FILED: May 29, 2012
More informationJOHANNES WILLEM DU TOIT ACCUSED NO 1 GIDEON JOHANNES THIART ACCUSED NO 2 MERCIA VAN DEVENTER ACCUSED NO 3
Reportable YES / NO Circulate to Judges YES / NO Circulate to MagistratesYES / NO IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA [NORTHERN CAPE DIVISION: DE AAR CIRCUIT] JUDGMENT CASE NUMBER: KS 8/2014 THE STATE AND
More informationIN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (JOHANNESBURG)
1 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 28, 2004 v No. 248599 Wayne Circuit Court WILLIAM DEREK MOTLEY-BEY, LC No. 03-001270-01 Defendant-Appellant.
More informationUNLAWFUL AND DANGEROUS ACT MANSLAUGHTER:
Unlawful and Dangerous Act Manslaughter 228 UNLAWFUL AND DANGEROUS ACT MANSLAUGHTER: R. v. WILLS1 The defendant ("D") was out shopping with his de facto wife when he saw in the street his legal wife from
More informationThe Queen. - v - DYLAN JACKSON. Sentencing Remarks of the Hon. Mr. Justice Picken. 10 December 2015
In the Crown Court at Nottingham The Queen - v - DYLAN JACKSON Sentencing Remarks of the Hon. Mr. Justice Picken 10 December 2015 1. After a trial lasting some eleven days or so including jury deliberations,
More informationDate of hearing Date of judgment JUDGMENT AND ORDER.
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya,Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 52(J) O5 Md. Muslemuddin..Appellant Versus- State of Assam...
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL KAMAL LIBURD. and JAMAL LIBURD. and THE QUEEN
ST. CHRISTOPHER AND NEVIS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.9 and 10 OF 2003 BETWEEN: KAMAL LIBURD and JAMAL LIBURD and THE QUEEN Before: The Hon. Mr. Albert Redhead The Hon. Mr. Brian Alleyne,
More informationCOMMONWEALTH vs. EMMANUEL LOUIS. No. 17-P-966. Middlesex. July 9, November 6, Present: Blake, Sacks, & Ditkoff, JJ.
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports. If you find a typographical error or other formal
More informationTopic 5 Non-fatal,Non-sexual offences against the person
Topic 5 Non-fatal,Non-sexual offences against the person Examine how the criminal law deals with some common harms against the person and cover the elements of several non-fatal, non-sexual offences against
More informationJUDGMENT THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY. Neutral citation: Minister of Safety and Security v Katise(328/12) [2013] ZASCA 111 (16 September 2013)
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: REPORTABLE Case No: 328/12 THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY APPELLANT and BONISILE JOHN KATISE RESPONDENT Neutral citation:
More informationSufficiency of Evidence. Introduction
Sufficiency of Evidence Introduction 1. After the Crown has concluded its evidence in a case the question may arise whether it has led sufficient evidence to entitle the jury to determine whether the accused
More informationTHE PROSECUTOR GENERAL OF ZIMBABWE versus SAMSON SHUMBAYARERWA and THE MAGISTRATE, HARARE (TSIKWA N.O)
THE PROSECUTOR GENERAL OF ZIMBABWE versus SAMSON SHUMBAYARERWA and THE MAGISTRATE, HARARE (TSIKWA N.O) 1 HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE HUNGWE & MANGOTA JJ HARARE, 9 & 23 October 2014 Criminal Appeal T Madzingira,
More informationPRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS AND THE APPLICATION OF R. v. K.G.B.
PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS AND THE APPLICATION OF R. v. K.G.B. Brian D. Williston THE ORTHODOX RULE Until recently, the "orthodox rule" dictated that prior inconsistent statements made by a non-party
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CPL. 443 MONTOUTE. And DELVIN GEORGE. 2009: July 24, 29 and 30
SAINT LUCIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO. SLUHCR 2007/ 0014 BETWEEN: CPL. 443 MONTOUTE And DELVIN GEORGE Appearances: Mr. Alfred Alcide for the Defendant Mr. Robert Innocent for the Crown 2009:
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 312 OF 2010 VERSUS J U D G M E N T
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 312 OF 2010 LALTU GHOSH STATE OF WEST BENGAL VERSUS...APPELLANT...RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR,
More informationDouble Jeopardy (Scotland) Bill
Double Jeopardy (Scotland) Bill Groupings of Amendments for Stage 2 This document provides procedural information which will assist in preparing for and following proceedings on the above Bill. The information
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Criminal Appeal (J) No. 63 of 2014 Bhupen Doley, Son of Late Punya Doley, Resident of Jon Misuk, Sisi Kolghor,
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs at Knoxville May 21, 2013
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs at Knoxville May 21, 2013 DOUGLAS KILLINS v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Circuit Court for Montgomery County No. 40200141
More informationNOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2009 KA 2323 I STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS LARRY D HUNLEY On Appeal from the 19th Judicial District Court Parish of East Baton
More informationCASE NO. 1D Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, Glen P. Gifford, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA ROBERT LAMAR GERALD, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D13-1362
More informationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT (JOHANNESBURG)
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH
More informationDocument references: Prior decisions - Special Rapporteur s rule 91 decision, dated 28 December 1992 (not issued in document form)
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE Kulomin v. Hungary Communication No. 521/1992 16 March 1994 CCPR/C/50/D/521/1992 * ADMISSIBILITY Submitted by: Vladimir Kulomin Alleged victim: The author State party: Hungary Date
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 15AP-636 v. : (C.P.C. No. 13CR-2045)
[Cite as State v. Ferguson, 2016-Ohio-363.] State of Ohio, : IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 15AP-636 v. : (C.P.C. No. 13CR-2045) Elizabeth J. Ferguson,
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY INTRODUCTION
[Cite as State v. Vonnjordsson, 2009-Ohio-836.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) STATE OF OHIO C. A. No. 24157 Appellee v. KREIGHHAMMER VONNJORDSSON
More informationUNITED STATES V. MATTHEWS ET AL. [2 Betts, C. C. MS. 49.] Circuit Court, S. D. New York. Dec. 18, 1843.
YesWeScan: The FEDERAL CASES UNITED STATES V. MATTHEWS ET AL. Case No. 15,741b. [2 Betts, C. C. MS. 49.] Circuit Court, S. D. New York. Dec. 18, 1843. CRIMINAL LAW JOINT INDICTMENT SEPARATE TRIALS DRAWING
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN)
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) High Court Ref No: 13858 Goodwood Case No: C1658/2012 In the matter between: STATE And RAYMOND TITUS ACCUSED Coram: BINNS-WARD & ROGERS
More informationSOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, JOHANNESBURG
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: SS 50/2009 DATE: 15/03/2011 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED...... DATE SIGNATURE In
More informationSTATE OF OHIO LARRY GRAY
[Cite as State v. Gray, 2010-Ohio-5842.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 94282 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. LARRY GRAY DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
More informationCriminal Appeal No. 16 Appellate Division of the High Court January 15, YONA NGERUANGEL, Appellant
H.C.T.T. App. Div. TRUST TERRITORY REPORTS Nov. 25, 1959 evidence obtained in violation of other provisions of law, they should follow the more generally accepted rule and admit the evidence, provided
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN Reportable: YES/NO Of Interest to other Judges: YES/NO Circulate to Magistrates: YES/NO Review No. : 62/2017 THE STATE versus TEBOHO
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs June 2, 2010
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs June 2, 2010 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BILLY EARL MCILLWAIN, JR. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Gibson County No. 17837 Clayburn
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. THANDI SHERYL MAQUBELA (Accused 1 in the Court a quo)
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 821/2015 In the matter between: THANDI SHERYL MAQUBELA APPELLANT (Accused 1 in the Court a quo) and THE STATE RESPONDENT Neutral
More informationDomestic. Violence. In the State of Florida. Beware. Know Your Rights Get a Lawyer. Ruth Ann Hepler, Esq. & Michael P. Sullivan, Esq.
Domestic Violence In the State of Florida Beware Know Your Rights Get a Lawyer Ruth Ann Hepler, Esq. & Michael P. Sullivan, Esq. Introduction You ve been charged with domestic battery. The judge is threatening
More informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Criminal Law/Criminal Procedure/Constitutional Law And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT : MTHATHA CASE NO. 1299/06. In the matter between: and THE MINSTER OF SAFETY JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT : MTHATHA CASE NO. 1299/06 In the matter between: THANDILE FUNDA Plaintiff and THE MINSTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY Defendant JUDGMENT MILLER, J.:
More informationv. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE ELIZABETH B. LACY March 3, 2005 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: All the Justices STEPHEN JAMES HOOD v. Record No. 040774 OPINION BY JUSTICE ELIZABETH B. LACY March 3, 2005 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Stephen James Hood was
More informationSupreme Court of India. Lallu Manjhi & Anr vs State Of Jharkhand on 7 January, Author: R Lahoti Bench: R.C. Lahoti, Brijesh Kumar.
Supreme Court of India Lallu Manjhi & Anr vs State Of Jharkhand on 7 January, 2003 Author: R Lahoti Bench: R.C. Lahoti, Brijesh Kumar. CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 15 of 2002 PETITIONER: Lallu Manjhi & Anr.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAND AND TOBAGO Defendant
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No.: CV2011-04900 BETWEEN DENZIL FORDE Claimant AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAND AND TOBAGO Defendant Before the Honourable Mr. Justice
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON November 5, 2002 Session
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON November 5, 2002 Session MICHAEL JOSEPH SPADAFINA v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Benton County No. CR451 Julian
More informationFREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. THE STATE and [T.] [J ] [M..] Accused 1 [M.] [R.] [M.] Accused 2
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI JOSEPH RONALD HARTFIELD A/K/A APPELLANT RONALD DREW HARTFIELD V. NO.
E-Filed Document Sep 17 2014 07:04:12 2012-CT-01232-SCT Pages: 14 THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI JOSEPH RONALD HARTFIELD A/K/A APPELLANT RONALD DREW HARTFIELD V. NO. 2012-CT-01232-SCT STATE
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 8, 2006 Session
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 8, 2006 Session WILLIAM B. ROBINSON v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 2001-A-383 Steve
More informationNOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA KIMBERLY D. RASLEY, Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED v. CASE NO. 1D02-3897
More informationTRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. The State AND. Latchman Deosaran RULING. Friday January 28 th 2011
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CR NO. 114 OF 2008 BETWEEN The State AND Latchman Deosaran BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. HOLDIP Appearances: Mr. Jeron Joseph for the State Mr. Bindra
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: JOHN T. WILSON Anderson, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana KELLY A. MIKLOS Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana IN
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
Circulate to Magistrates: Yes / No Reportable: Yes / No Circulate to Judges: Yes / No IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (Northern Cape Division) Case No.: K/S 71/06 Heard: Delivered: 06/09/2007 THE STATE
More informationMock Trial Practice Law Test
Mock Trial Practice Law Test NOTE: The practice law test is provided as an example and will not be updated each year. Below are sample questions that are similar to those that students may see on the real
More informationTRIAL DOCUMENTS PROVING, TENDERING AND CROSS-EXAMINATION
TRIAL DOCUMENTS PROVING, TENDERING AND CROSS-EXAMINATION I take my topic to require a discussion of the use of documents in one s own case evidence in chief and in the opponent s case cross-examination.
More informationMEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH
MEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH August 11, 2016 16-16 No Charges Approved in Vancouver Police Shooting Victoria - The Criminal Justice Branch (CJB), Ministry of Justice and Attorney General, announced
More informationThrough Mr. K.B. Andley, Sr. Advocate with Mr. M.L. Yadav, Advocate. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 450/1998. Versus. ... Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 383/1998 Reserved on: 10th January, 2014 Date of Decision: 24th January, 2014 CHANDER PAL SINGH... Appellant Through
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED December 28, 2004 v No. 250029 Wayne Circuit Court MARVIN HOTCHKISS, JR., LC No. 03-002803-01 Defendant-Appellant.
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE. STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JUMBO KURI
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JUMBO KURI Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 97-D-2767 Walter Kurtz, Judge No. M1999-00638-CCA-R3-CD
More informationThe Criminal Court System. Law 521 Chapter Seven
The Criminal Court System Law 521 Chapter Seven The Feds make criminal law and procedure. Criminal Court Structure Provinces responsible for organizing, administering, and maintaining the criminal court
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC04-21 LOWER CASE NO.: 2D REPLY BRIEF OF PETITIONER S BRIEF ON THE MERITS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA RAYMOND BAUGH, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / CASE NO.: SC04-21 LOWER CASE NO.: 2D02-2758 REPLY BRIEF OF PETITIONER S BRIEF ON THE MERITS On Discretionary
More informationThe defendant has been charged with second degree murder. 1. Under the law and the evidence in this case, it is your duty to return
PAGE 1 OF 14 NOTE WELL: If self-defense is at issue and the assault occurred in defendant s home, place of residence, workplace or motor vehicle, see N.C.P.I. Crim. 308.80, Defense of Habitation. The defendant
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: Reportable Case No: 409/2015 MATHEWS SIPHO LELAKA APPELLANT And THE STATE RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Lelaka v The State (409/15)
More informationNOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 116,399 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, SARAH B. ALCORN, Appellant.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 116,399 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. SARAH B. ALCORN, Appellant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Appeal from Reno District Court; TIMOTHY
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION. v. CASE NO. 6:18-cr-43-Orl-37DCI JOINTLY PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS
Case 6:18-cr-00043-RBD-DCI Document 51 Filed 08/13/18 Page 1 of 34 PageID 307 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CASE NO. 6:18-cr-43-Orl-37DCI
More informationS19A0439. CARPENTER v. THE STATE. Benjamin Carpenter was tried by a DeKalb County jury and. convicted of murder and possession of a firearm during the
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: April 15, 2019 S19A0439. CARPENTER v. THE STATE. BLACKWELL, Justice. Benjamin Carpenter was tried by a DeKalb County jury and convicted of murder and possession
More informationCOMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS APPEALS COURT COMMONWEALTH. vs. MICHAEL S. GILL. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
NOTICE: Summary decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28, as amended by 73 Mass. App. Ct. 1001 (2009), are primarily directed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address
More informationS12A0623. JACKSON v. THE STATE. Following a jury trial, Cecil Jackson, Jr. appeals his conviction for malice
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: April 24, 2012 S12A0623. JACKSON v. THE STATE. MELTON, Justice. Following a jury trial, Cecil Jackson, Jr. appeals his conviction for malice murder, aggravated
More informationMULTI CHOICE QUESTIONS EVI301-A
MULTI CHOICE QUESTIONS EVI301-A 2010 Second Semester Assignment 1 Question 1 If the current South African law does not provide a solution to an evidentiary problem, our courts will first of all search
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC07-610
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC07-610 LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 3D05-39 TRACY McLIN, CIRCUIT CASE NO. 94-11235 -vs- Appellant, STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. / APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH
More informationIN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, PIETERMARITZBURG J U D G M E N T
REPORTABLE IN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, PIETERMARITZBURG REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No. 8774/09 In the matter between: THULANI SIFISO MAZIBUKO AMBROSE SIMPHIWE CEBEKHULU FIRST APPELLANT SECOND APPELLANT
More informationA-level LAW. Paper 1 SPECIMEN MATERIAL
SPECIMEN MATERIAL Please write clearly, in block capitals. Centre number Candidate number Surname Forename(s) Candidate signature A-level LAW Paper 1 Specimen 2016 Time allowed: 2 hours Instructions Use
More informationCASE NO. 1D Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA MICHAEL DAVID DUNN, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D14-4924
More informationSTATE OF LOUISIANA NO KA-0511 VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL JOHN E. RIVERS FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *
STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS JOHN E. RIVERS * * * * * * * * * * * NO. 2014-KA-0511 COURT OF APPEAL FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA APPEAL FROM 25TH JDC, PARISH OF PLAQUEMINES NO. 13-00959, DIVISION B Honorable
More informationEvidence. 1. Introduction. 1.1 The trial process EA ss 11, Background to The Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and NSW. 1.3 Taking Objections
Evidence 1. Introduction 1.1 The trial process EA ss 11, 26-29 1.2 Background to The Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and NSW Uniform Evidence Law ALRC Evidence Interim and Final Reports would be useful for interpreting
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Owing Goring AND. The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2011-03769 BETWEEN Owing Goring AND Claimant The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago Defendant Before the Honourable Mr.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 17 OF 2006 BETWEEN: KIRK GORDON Appellant AND THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice Mottley President The Hon. Mr. Justice Sosa
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed November 24, Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Carl D.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 0-564 / 09-1934 Filed November 24, 2010 STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. KYLE GENE DEEMER, Defendant-Appellant. Judge. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for
More informationLaw 12 Substantive Assignments Reading Booklet
Law 12 Substantive Assignments Reading Booklet Reading # 1: Police and the Law Training and Qualifications Police officers have to go through both physical and academic training to become members of the
More informationENTRY ORDER 2017 VT 37 SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO APRIL TERM, 2017
ENTRY ORDER 2017 VT 37 SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2017-108 APRIL TERM, 2017 State of Vermont } APPEALED FROM: } } v. } Superior Court, Rutland Unit, } Criminal Division } Peggy L. Shores } DOCKET NO. 235-2-17
More informationIn the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION III STATE OF MISSOURI, ) No. ED100873 ) Respondent, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court ) of the City of St. Louis vs. ) ) Honorable Elizabeth Byrne
More information