Part 8- Judgment Flashcards
How must the judgment be delivered?
The judgment is required to be delivered:
1) In open court;
2) Within a reasonable time;
3) In a language that the accused understands;
4) In respect of each and every offence;
5) With reasons given in respect of each conclusion that the presiding officer has arrived on any question of law or fact.
What follows after both parties have given their closing arguments?
After listening to closing argument by either party the court is required to deliver a judgment.
What is a competent verdict?
COMPETENT VERDICTS
Sections 256-270 of the CPA identify instances and offences, which permit a competent verdict (judgment) to be handed down.
In other words, where the evidence of the offence in respect of which an accused is charged falls short of proving all the essential elements of the offence in question, the accused can still be found guilty of a ‘lesser’ offence which our law refers to as a competent verdict.
In all cases where the offence charged proves only an attempt, then an attempt to commit that offence is a competent verdict in respect of the offence (s 256).
In what sources of law are competent verdicts based?
Our law does not provide for common law competent verdicts. They are all statutorily based or sourced.
What is the State required to prove with regard to a competent verdict?
It is important to keep in mind that a competent verdict does not automatically follow as a ‘catch-all’ remedy for the state.
It is still incumbent on the state to prove all the elements of the ‘lesser’ or alternative (competent) verdict beyond reasonable doubt.
What duty is imposed on the courts in instances of an unrepresented accused, with regards to competent verdicts?
The constitutional right to a fair trial in terms of s 35(3) has been interpreted by our courts, in so far as competent verdicts are concerned, to mean that an unrepresented accused therefore has a right to be informed of the main offence as well as any competent verdict in respect of such offence (See S v Fielies 2006 (1) SACR 302 (C)).
What does the competent verdict of ‘accessory after the fact’ entail?
In terms of s257 of CPA if the evidence fails to prove the accused was a co-perpetrator or main perpetrator or accomplice, but assisted the main offender(s) in some manner, the accused can be convicted as an accessory after the fact.
The sentence imposed may not exceed what it would have been had he been convicted as an accessory.
If the evidence fails to prove that an accused is guilty of murder or attempted murder, what competent verdicts can the accused still be found guilty of?
In terms of s258 of the CPA if an accused cannot be convicted of murder or attempted murder, he may still be found guilty of:
1) Culpable homicide;
2) Assault with intent to do GBH;
3) Common assault;
4) Robbery;
6) In the case relating to a child, the offence of exposing an infant, whether under statute or common law, or the offence of disposing of the body of a child, in contravention of the General Law Amendment Act 1946 of 1935 with intent to conceal the fact of its birth;
7) Public violence; and
8) Pointing a firearm, air gun or air-pistol in contravention of any law.
If the evidence fails to prove that an accused is guilty of robbery, what competent verdicts can he still be found guilty of?
In terms of s260 of the CPA, this is the only offence where an accused can be convicted of two (2) other crimes if the main offence is not proved.
The competent verdicts are:
- Theft; and
- Common assault.
When may the court amend a judgment?
The general rule in our law is that once a court has handed down its judgment it is functus officio, however,
s176 of the CPA provides that:
‘When by mistake a wrong judgment is delivered, the court may, before or immediately after it is recorded, amend the judgment.’
A similar provision is catered for in respect of the passing of sentences in terms of s 298.
To what extent may a court employ the s176 amendment of judgment?
The extent to which a court may employ s176 is limited to situations where the court needs to amend linguistic mistakes or certain minor changes.
However, a verdict given because of a misdirection or irregularity would not be saved by s176.
