criminal procedure 3701
ASSIGNMENT 01 SEMESTER 01 2025
All question answered
Two options are provided to choose between and avoid plagiarism
Add names and student number , submit all work done for you
Distinction guarantee 100%
, question
Four assailants, A, B, C and D are engaged in an armed robbery at Shiny Things, a
jewellery store located inside the Mall For All shopping centre in Kimberley,
Northern Cape. During the ensuing fracas, a firefight ensues, as the security
guards employed by the shopping centre attempt to foil the robbery. A is arrested
inside the jewellery store by F, one of the security guards. However, B, C and D
manage to escape with an undisclosed amount in fine jewellery and cash.
1. B and C are subsequently arrested two weeks later in Cape Town, Western
Cape, in the process of committing another robbery.
(a) Briefly state the court(s) (according to the hierarchy of courts, not the location)
which should enjoy trial jurisdiction in respect of the charges set out above, and
the reason why the case may be heard in the jurisdiction(s) concerned;
(3)
(b) Critically evaluate which court should enjoy jurisdiction over A, B and C, in light
of the facts set out above.
(4)
2. In terms of section 35(3)(d) of the Constitution, and section 50 of the Criminal
Procedure Act, an arrestee must be brought before court as soon as reasonably
possible. B and C (the accused) were arrested on Tuesday at 10h00, and detained
at the Cape Town police station, whilst awaiting to be transferred to Kimberley, to
be joined with A in respect of the robbery committed in Kimberley. Inspector
Nosey Kekana only brings the accused before court on Friday (of the same week),
at 15h00. The accused subsequently challenge their detention as unlawful and
“falling foul of legislative and Constitutional imperative”. Critically evaluate the
accused’s argument, in light of the facts set out above. (5)
3. After pleading ‘not guilty’ to the charges. Two state witnesses are led in
evidence. The court sets down the case to a different date for further hearing.
Briefly explain whether the ‘setting down’ of the case to a different date as
explained above constitutes a postponement or an adjournment (and why you
say so). (3)
ASSIGNMENT 01 SEMESTER 01 2025
All question answered
Two options are provided to choose between and avoid plagiarism
Add names and student number , submit all work done for you
Distinction guarantee 100%
, question
Four assailants, A, B, C and D are engaged in an armed robbery at Shiny Things, a
jewellery store located inside the Mall For All shopping centre in Kimberley,
Northern Cape. During the ensuing fracas, a firefight ensues, as the security
guards employed by the shopping centre attempt to foil the robbery. A is arrested
inside the jewellery store by F, one of the security guards. However, B, C and D
manage to escape with an undisclosed amount in fine jewellery and cash.
1. B and C are subsequently arrested two weeks later in Cape Town, Western
Cape, in the process of committing another robbery.
(a) Briefly state the court(s) (according to the hierarchy of courts, not the location)
which should enjoy trial jurisdiction in respect of the charges set out above, and
the reason why the case may be heard in the jurisdiction(s) concerned;
(3)
(b) Critically evaluate which court should enjoy jurisdiction over A, B and C, in light
of the facts set out above.
(4)
2. In terms of section 35(3)(d) of the Constitution, and section 50 of the Criminal
Procedure Act, an arrestee must be brought before court as soon as reasonably
possible. B and C (the accused) were arrested on Tuesday at 10h00, and detained
at the Cape Town police station, whilst awaiting to be transferred to Kimberley, to
be joined with A in respect of the robbery committed in Kimberley. Inspector
Nosey Kekana only brings the accused before court on Friday (of the same week),
at 15h00. The accused subsequently challenge their detention as unlawful and
“falling foul of legislative and Constitutional imperative”. Critically evaluate the
accused’s argument, in light of the facts set out above. (5)
3. After pleading ‘not guilty’ to the charges. Two state witnesses are led in
evidence. The court sets down the case to a different date for further hearing.
Briefly explain whether the ‘setting down’ of the case to a different date as
explained above constitutes a postponement or an adjournment (and why you
say so). (3)
