Nacagilevu v The State [1996] FJHC 41; Haa0035j.96s (26 August 1996)

Fiji Islands - Nacagilevu v The State - Pacific Law Materials

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI

(AT SUVA)

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. HAA0035 OF /span>

BETWEEN:

MEKEMEKE NACAGILEVU
Appellant

AND:

STATE
Respondepondent

Appellant in person
Rachel Olutimayin for the Respondentp class=MsoNormal style="margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> 1"> Date of Hear26th August 1996
Date of Judgment: 26th August 1996

JUDGMENT

The Appellant appeals against entence of three years imprisonment imposed on him by the Resident Magistrate at Suva on 19on 19th December 1995 for robbery with violence. The Appellant was charged that on 23rd September 1995 at Nasinu he robbed one Jagdish Singh of various foodstuffs of a total value of $40.00 and immediately before he robbed used personal violence on Jagdish Singh. The Appellant pleaded not guilty and after a trial lasting one day was duly found guilty.

In his application for leave to appeal out of time against the sentence t Deputy Registrar of this Chis Court, dated 20th February 1996, the Appellant claimed among other things that he was a first offender, despite the fact that in the Magistrate's Court after he had been found guilty he admitted six prior convictions dating from the 25th of July 1990 for common assault, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, acting with intent to cause grievous harm, larceny, robbery with violence and damaging property. He submitted on his appeal that the offence and the sentence imposed by the Magistrate's Court are not consistent or as he put it "do not tie-up" because he said that he had stolen only three bottles of beer. When I pointed out to him that as he had been found guilty as charged in the lower Court and was now only appealing against sentence he must be deemed to have admitted the facts alleged in the charge against him he agreed. He then pleaded for a lower sentence on the grounds that he was aged 22 and is married.

In the Court below the learned Magistrate said before pronounsentence:

"This is a serious offence. Robbery as well as robbery with violence are offences on the rise in Fiji. A deterrent is definitely warranted. In my view a custodial sentence is warranted. I have taken his mitigation and his age into consideration.

I will impose a sentence of threes imprisonment on the accusaccused even though I believe that three years is more on the lenient side."

I respectfully agith these remarks. This offence is on the increase in Fiji and the Courts must try to do sodo something to deter people such as the Appellant from committing it. The learned Magistrate also said that he considered the sentence he imposed was rather lenient; so do I. I am satisfied that no error of law or principle was committed by the Court below. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

JOHN E. BYRNE
JUDGE

Haa0035j.96s