Brannon Jonathan Petersen v The State

The appellant was convicted in 1998 of attempted rape of an eight-year-old girl, and the rape and murder of a nine-year-old girl, committed when he was 18 and 19 years old. He was declared a dangerous criminal under s 286A of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 and sentenced to an indeterminate term of imprisonment under s 286B, with reconsideration after 17 years. After the expiry of that period, reconsideration proceedings were held in 2015 and again in 2018–2019 before Hlophe JP. On 29 August 2019 the High Court ordered further detention for five years. The reconsideration proceedings were marked by multiple postponements, absence of a parole board report, and the appellant was not afforded a proper opportunity to present evidence. The appellant appealed against the further detention order.

The appeal was upheld. The High Court order dated 29 August 2019 was set aside. The matter was remitted to the Western Cape High Court for reconsideration of the indeterminate sentence in terms of s 286B of the Criminal Procedure Act, to be heard by a different judge within specified timeframes, with required parole board and expert reports to be filed.

The case reinforces that indeterminate sentences under ss 286A and 286B are constitutionally permissible only if their procedural safeguards are strictly observed. It affirms that reconsideration hearings must be conducted as de novo sentencing enquiries, with full procedural fairness, and that failure to obtain and consider a parole board report constitutes a fatal irregularity. The judgment provides authoritative guidance on the proper conduct of sentence reconsiderations for dangerous criminals.