The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) has cleared the way for a convicted armed robber to challenge the length of his prison sentence, overturning an earlier decision that blocked his bid to appeal.
Ezhiah Skhumbuzo Mvubu, who is currently serving an effective 30-year term, will now have his case reconsidered by the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) High Court in Pietermaritzburg.
Mvubu and his brother were tried in the Newcastle Regional Court on a range of serious charges stemming from an incident in 2008.
Evidence presented during the trial showed that the pair stormed a Pick n Pay store, where they assaulted employees before making off with R48 474.12 in cash.
They also robbed two victims of their cellphones.
Mvubu was arrested the following day, on 15 February 2008, in Volksrust after being found in possession of firearms and ammunition.
30 years in jail
Following his conviction, Mvubu received multiple sentences: 15 years for three counts of robbery with aggravating circumstances; 15 years for firearm-related offences involving R5 automatic assault rifles and a semi-automatic LM rifle; one year for possession of 66 rounds of ammunition; and five years for vehicle theft.
Although some of these sentences were ordered to run concurrently, the overall structure resulted in an effective term of 30 years.
The regional court further ruled that he must serve at least two-thirds of this term before becoming eligible for parole.
Mvubu’s attempts to challenge his sentence in both the regional court and the high court were unsuccessful.
In 2022, he escalated the matter to the SCA, focusing his appeal on the severity of the sentences for robbery and vehicle theft.
His legal representatives argued that there were reasonable prospects that another court might impose a different sentence.
The state, however, argued that the sentence was appropriate, saying the 30-year prison term is not shocking given the seriousness of the crimes.
SCA judgment
In an assessment of the original sentencing, Acting SCA Judge Majake Meshack Mabesele pointed out that a 30-year jail term was normally “reserved for those cases falling within the highest range of wrongdoing”.
He found that the magistrate’s reasoning for structuring the sentences as he did was insufficient, describing it as “sparse”.
Mabesele also highlighted a lack of clarity in how the offences were classified as exceptionally serious.
“He failed to give due consideration to the appellant’s personal circumstances, which include his clean record, his prospects of rehabilitation, his age (32 years), and the absence of serious injuries sustained by the victims.
“Moreover, the magistrate did not provide full and compelling reasons to demonstrate that the judicial discretion to impose a just sentence was properly exercised.
“The paucity of reasons provided by the magistrate for the passing of such a long sentence entitles this court to reverse the decision of the high court to refuse leave to appeal on sentence,” the 29 April judgment reads.
The SCA upheld Mvubu’s appeal, granting him the opportunity to have his sentence reconsidered.
The case will now be heard afresh by a full bench of the KZN High Court.
