S v Hermanus
| Jurisdiction | South Africa |
| Judge | Hefer JA, Vivier JA and Harms JA |
| Judgment Date | 16 September 1994 |
| Citation | 1995 (1) SACR 10 (A) |
| Hearing Date | 16 September 1994 |
| Counsel | J A du Plessis for the appellant A A L Neill for the State |
| Court | Appellate Division |
Vivier JA:
The appellant, on her plea of guilty, was convicted in the magistrate's court on a charge of dealing in dangerous dependence-producing drugs in contravention of s 2(c) of Act 41 of 1971. She was sentenced to four years' imprisonment of which two years' E imprisonment was conditionally suspended for five years. Her appeal to the Witwatersrand Local Division against sentence failed. Subsequently leave was granted upon petition to appeal to this Court against the sentence.
After hearing argument this Court allowed the appeal, stating that reasons and the order would be furnished later. The reasons and order follow. F
At the trial the appellant admitted to having sold 20 tablets containing phendimetrazine, a dangerous dependence-producing substance, commonly known as Obex. She had obtained the Obex tablets lawfully on a medical doctor's prescription for her own use in order to lose weight and had G previously given some Obex tablets to a friend of hers. The friend was arrested and informed the police that she had obtained the tablets from the appellant. A trap was set up and on 14 March 1990, and in Eloff Street, Johannesburg, the appellant sold the 20 tablets to a policeman acting as a trap at a price of R7 per tablet after he had informed her that her friend had sent him to her. Although the appellant had been charged with possessing six more tablets with the intention of selling H them, this was not proved.
The appellant is a 33-year-old woman and the mother of two children aged 12 and seven years who are dependent on...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
S v Mako
...dictum in para [38] applied G S v Eales 1991 (1) SACR 160 (N): considered S v Gwele 1991 (1) SACR 107 (Tk): considered S v Hermanus 1995 (1) SACR 10 (A): dictum at 12d - h S v Khulu 1975 (2) SA 518 (N): dicta at 521G & 522A - C applied H S v Koekemoer 1973 (1) SA 909 (N): dictum at 911H - 9......
-
S v Mako
...precedents serve only as guidelines.' [7] 1992 (2) SACR 613 (A) at 617f - g. [8] 1982 (1) SA 99 (A) at 102A - F. See too S v Hermanus 1995 (1) SACR 10 (A) at 12d - [9] 1972 (3) SA 396 (A) at 410G - H. [10] 2001 (1) SACR 594 (CC) (2001 (3) SA 382; 2001 (5) BCLR 423) in para [38]. [11] See S ......
-
S v Mofokeng
...irregular, as the magistrate implicitly suggested, nor without precedent (cf S v Larsen 1994 (2) SACR 149 (A), at 157; S v Ingram 1995 (1) SACR 10 (A)). In my view, it is sheer impertinence of the highest order for the regional court magistrate to suggest that the two appeal judges failed t......
-
S v Ingram
...Court to sentence the appellant afresh. In the result I propose making an order similar to that J made in S v Potgieter (supra at 88e). 1995 (1) SACR p10 Smalberger A The appeal succeeds in part. The conviction is confirmed, but the sentence is set aside. The matter is remitted to the trial......
-
S v Mako
...dictum in para [38] applied G S v Eales 1991 (1) SACR 160 (N): considered S v Gwele 1991 (1) SACR 107 (Tk): considered S v Hermanus 1995 (1) SACR 10 (A): dictum at 12d - h S v Khulu 1975 (2) SA 518 (N): dicta at 521G & 522A - C applied H S v Koekemoer 1973 (1) SA 909 (N): dictum at 911H - 9......
-
S v Mako
...precedents serve only as guidelines.' [7] 1992 (2) SACR 613 (A) at 617f - g. [8] 1982 (1) SA 99 (A) at 102A - F. See too S v Hermanus 1995 (1) SACR 10 (A) at 12d - [9] 1972 (3) SA 396 (A) at 410G - H. [10] 2001 (1) SACR 594 (CC) (2001 (3) SA 382; 2001 (5) BCLR 423) in para [38]. [11] See S ......
-
S v Mofokeng
...irregular, as the magistrate implicitly suggested, nor without precedent (cf S v Larsen 1994 (2) SACR 149 (A), at 157; S v Ingram 1995 (1) SACR 10 (A)). In my view, it is sheer impertinence of the highest order for the regional court magistrate to suggest that the two appeal judges failed t......
-
S v Ingram
...Court to sentence the appellant afresh. In the result I propose making an order similar to that J made in S v Potgieter (supra at 88e). 1995 (1) SACR p10 Smalberger A The appeal succeeds in part. The conviction is confirmed, but the sentence is set aside. The matter is remitted to the trial......