Dumisani Sithole v The State

The appellant was convicted on his own plea of guilty in the magistrates’ court on two counts of driving a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor, in contravention of section 122(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Act 29 of 1989. He had an extensive history of similar offences dating back to 1987, including multiple convictions for drunken driving, some committed during periods of suspended sentences or while awaiting trial. The magistrate sentenced him to three years’ imprisonment on each count (six years cumulatively) and cancelled his driver’s licence. On appeal, the Natal Provincial Division set aside the six-year sentence and substituted it with four years’ imprisonment under section 276(1)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, entailing a limited custodial component followed by correctional supervision, while confirming the cancellation of the licence. The appellant further appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the sentence.

The appeal was dismissed. The sentence of four years’ imprisonment imposed in terms of section 276(1)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act, together with the cancellation of the appellant’s driver’s licence, was confirmed.

The case is significant for reaffirming South African sentencing principles in drunken driving cases, particularly that alcoholism does not excuse such offences and may aggravate them. It underscores the need to balance rehabilitation with deterrence and public safety, especially for repeat offenders, and clarifies the circumstances in which correctional supervision is inappropriate.