Saulekaleka v The State [2001] FJHC 107; Haa0050.2001s (17 August 2001)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
Appellate Jurisdiction

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: HAA 050 OF 2001S

BETWEEN:

PONIASI SAULEKALEKA
Appellant

&

THE STATE
Respondent

Appellant in Person
Mr. B Solanki for Respondent

Hearing: 10th August 2001
Judgment: 17th August 2001

JUDGMENT

The Appellant was convicted, on his plea of guilty on 18^th May 2001, of the following offence.

Statement of Offence

LARCENY FROM PERSON: Contrary to section 271 of the Penal Code, Act 17.

Particulars of Offence

PONIASI SAULEKALEKA, on the 12^th day of May 2001, at Suva in the Central Division, stole one brown wallet containing cash of $237.00 (FJD) and 50 pounds ($150.00 FJD), to the total value of $387.00 from the person of EDWARD TWENTYMAN.

The facts as read by the prosecution were that on 12^th May 2001, one Edward Twentyman a visitor of the United Kingdom, was shopping at the Suva Market at about 12.30pm. While taking photographs the Appellant took his wallet out of his back pocket. The Appellant ran away but was caught by members of the public. The wallet was later recovered with $387.00 in it, intact

The facts were admitted. The Appellant was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment. He now appeals against that sentence, saying that it was harsh and excessive. In his submissions, he said that he was in a desperate financial situation after his wife lost her job in the May 19^th crisis, that the money was recovered, and that he would not re-offend. The State opposes the appeal, saying the at the sentence is within the tariff, and that offences against tourists are prevalent. No local authorities were referred to me on ‘pickpocketing’ but ht English authorities appear to suggest a tariff of 12 months (one count) to 18 months.

In Rohen Kumar Perera (1984) Cr. App. R 50 a 28 year old offender was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for stealing a wallet from a person on the underground. The sentence was upheld on appeal. The appellant had three previous convictions for theft, burglary, and handling stolen goods.

In Warran Anthony Spenser & Anr. -v- R (1995) 16 Cr. App. R (s) sentences of 30 months imprisonment and 3 years imprisonment were upheld for convictions on two counts of theft, offenders with long lists of previous convictions who were engaged in pickpocketing in the London Underground.

In the case of this Appellant, there is no evidence of planning. However he had a list of 7 previous convictions, none of which are for Larceny from Person. He does not appear to be a habitual pick-pocket.

The wallet was recovered by police and restored to the complaint. This was not the most serious offence of its kind. As such, accepting 12 months to 18 months imprisonment as tariff for pick-pocketing offences, an appropriate starting pointing would be 15 months imprisonment. After a discount of 5 months for the guilty plea I consider a sentence of 10 months imprisonment to be an appropriate sentence.

This appeal is successful. The Appellant’s sentence is reduced to 10 months imprisonment.

Nazhat Shameem
JUDGE

At Suva
17^th August 2001