Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T17:08:16Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T17:08:16Z
dc.date.created 2007-04-19 en
dc.identifier.citation [2008] ZACC 2
dc.identifier.citation 2008 (3) SA 608 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2008 (5) BCLR 451 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2008 (2) SACR 76 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3258
dc.title S v Molimi en
dc.title.alternative CCT10/07 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT10/07 en
dc.contributor.judge Nkabinde J
dc.date.judgment 4 March 2008
dc.link.judgment http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/3258/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%20%28295%20Kb%29-11697.pdf?sequence=12&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis Challenge against the constitutionality of evidence (statements made by co accuseds in a criminal trial) used against an accused (the applicant), in terms of Section 3 of the Law of Evidence Amendment Act, 1988. The court held that the statements of the co accused were not admissible against the applicant. The admissible evidence of the cell phone records alone was insufficient to prove the applicant?s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court refrained from expressing any view on the question of whether the admission of hearsay evidence in terms of the Law of Evidence Amendment Act denies the accused the right to cross-examination. Majority: Nkabinde J (unanimous)
dc.concourt.casehistory Application for leave to appeal against the judgment and order of the SCA in S v Molimi and Another 2006 (2) SACR 8 (SCA). The SCA had dismissed the appeal by the appellants against their convictions in the Johannesburg High Court in S v Mbambo Sifiso and Others CC165/01, 9 October 2003, unreported. The applicant also seeks condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account