Dawai v State [2020] FJHC 1; HAA11.2019 (6 January 2020)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LABASA
APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL CASE NO. HAA 11 OF 2019

BETWEEN:
MAIKELI DAWAI
APPELLANT

A N D:
THE STATE
RESPONDENT

Counsel: Mr. A. Sen for Appellant
Ms. D. Rao for Respondent

Date of Hearing: 27^th November 2019

Date of Judgment: 06^th January 2020

J U D G M E N T

1. The Appellant had been charged in the Magistrate’s Court of Savusavu with one count of Unlawful Possession of Illicit Drugs, contrary to Section 5 (a) of the Illicit Drugs Control Act. The particulars of the offence are that:
   

Statement of Offence

UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF ILLICIT DRUGS: Contrary to Section 5 (a) of the Illicit Drugs Control Act 2004.

Particulars of Offence

MAIKELI DAWAI, on the 10^th day of August, 2016, at Savusavu, in the Northern Division, without lawful authority was found in possession of green plant materials and green leaves weighing 639.3gramms, an illicit drugs, botanically known as cannabis sativa.

2. Consequence upon the plea of not guilty of the Appellant, the matter had proceeded to hearing. The hearing had commenced on the 15th of March 2018 and concluded on the same day. The prosecution had presented the evidence of four witnesses. The Appellant and a witness had given evidence for the defence. In her judgment dated 14th of February 2019 the learned Magistrate found the Appellant guilty of this offence and convicted to the same accordingly. The learned Magistrate then sentenced the Appellant for a period of 26 months and 3 days imprisonment with a non-parole period of 20 months on the 13th of May 2019. Aggrieved with the said conviction and the sentence, the Appellant files this appeal on the following grounds of appeal.
   

Grounds of Appeal

1. The Learned Magistrate erred in law and in fact in convicting the accused for possession of illicit drugs when there was no evidence that the material alleged by police was either cannabis sativa or had the weight.
   
2. The Learned Magistrate erred in law and in fact in convicting the accused when there was no government analyst certificate under the Illicit Drugs Act.