State v Rokoqica [2015] FJMC 135; Criminal Case 400.2012 (26 October 2015)

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT AT LABASA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 400 of 2012

STATE

V

1. EMORI TURAYABE ROKOQICA
2. SOLOMONE DUNADAMU CIRIMAIWASA
   

Prosecution : Ms Vavadakua. A
Accused : 1. Ms Raisua. L
2. In Person

Sentence : 26 October 2015

SENTENCE

1. The Accused, Emori Turayabe Rokoqica and Solomone Dunadamu Cirimaiwasa, you are both before this court for sentence after being convicted to the charge of Aggravated Robbery, contrary to sections 311(1)(a) of the Crimes Decree 2009.

2. The charge was put to the First Accused on 31 August 2015, in the presence of his Counsel. The same charge was earlier put to the Second Accused on 22 June 2015, when he withdrew his instruction to Legal Aid Counsel and waived his right to Counsel and chose to defend his case in person. You both pleaded guilty to the charge. I find the plea to be unequivocal.

3. The summary of facts was read to the Second Accused on 6 July 2015, and to the First Accused on 29 September 2015, in the presence of his Counsel. You both admitted the summary of facts and you are both convicted as charged.

4. The brief summary of facts is that, on 22 July 2012, the victim Vikash Chand was driving his white station wagon taxi LT 5032 along the main street in Labasa about 1.30am when you stopped and boarded the taxi. You both seat at the back seat and asked the victim to drive you to Wailevu. At Wailevu you asked the victim to drive further and you go for about 1 kilometre. You stop the taxi as the Second Accused want to urinate. The Second Accused got off. The engine was still on and running when the First Accused grabbed the Victim's neck from behind. The engine went off and the victim managed to free himself, when the First Accused grip on victim's neck became loose. The Second Accused came on the driver's side. The Victim open the driver's door and hit the Second Accused and he fell down. The victim ran away into the cane field. When running, the victim heard his vehicle driven away by the First Accused. In the vehicle was Victim's wallet containing cash of $200.00, ink mobile phone valued at $99.00, black jacket valued at $30.00, the victim's dinner in his container was all taken together with the vehicle. The vehicle is valued at about $30,000.00. The Police was alerted by some of the nearby resident after the victim told them of what happened. The vehicle was driven by the First Accused and the Second Accused was seating in the passenger seat and they were heading to Dreketi. The vehicle was driven to Vunisitisiti Settlement where the Accused abandoned the vehicle after being followed and pursued by the Police. During the interview they admit that they had planned to tied the driver and take the taxi. Both admitted committing the offence. You ate the Victim's dinner and throw the container away. You removed the taxi sign to avoid being identified as taxi. You took the money in the wallet and throw the wallet away. Total value of items robbed is $30,335.00

5. The Second Accused submitted oral mitigation on 6 July 2015 and the Counsel for the First Accused filed written mitigation on 30 September 2015. There was no sentencing submission made by the prosecution.

6. The maximum penalty prescribed for Aggravated Robbery is 20 years imprisonment. The tariff for a single case of robbery was set in State v Manoa [2010] FJHC 409, from 8 years o 14 years imprisonment. There is also a separate tariff for spate of robberies as set in Nawalu v State, Criminal Appeal Case No. CAV 0012 of 2012, where the Supreme Court set the tariff from 10 to 16 years. The tariff for the violent robbery of taxi driver or public transport drivers is between 4 to 10 years imprisonment, depending on the force used or threatened as stated in State v Tamani [2011] FJHC 725.

7. In sentencing, my starting point is 6 years. I add two years and increase your sentence to 8 years for the following aggravating factors;-

(i) Well planned robbery;

(ii) Vulnerability of the victim as the driver of public transport;

(iii) Group offending; and

(iv) The value of the items robbed is $30,335.00.

8. The High Court in the case of Vilimone v State [2008] FJHC 12, recognised that one third of the sentence should be reduce for an early guilty plea. You were charged in 2012 and pleaded guilty in 2015. This cannot be regarded as an early guilty plea but I will reduce your sentence by 1 year for your guilty plea. That reduce your sentence to 7 years.

9. I reduce two years for the following mitigating factors;-

(i) Substantial recovery of items.

(ii) Co-operation with the Police.

(iii) Very remorseful.

(iv) Both 1st offenders.

10. That reduces your sentence to 5 years and it is within the tariff. Both the Accused were evading court for sometimes. It is not clear from the court record on the time in which the Second Accused was remanded in custody. What is clear from the record that the Second Accused remand was extended on 20 December 2014, and I will take this date as the date of remand in custody. The First Accused was remanded on 18 August 2015. In Bavoro v State [2013] FJHC 1, the court recognised that appropriate reduction in the sentence to reflect the remand period could be made under section 24 of the Sentencing and Penalties Decree 2009.

11. The First Accused was remanded from 18 August 2015 to today. That is a total of 2 months one week. The Second Accused was remanded from 20 December 2014 to today. That is a total of 10 months one week. The reduction on your the remand period, will make your final sentence as follows;-

(i) First Accused – 4 years 9 months 3 weeks.

(ii) Second Accused – 4 years 1 month 3 weeks.

12. It is a well established common law in this jurisdiction that violent robberies against drivers of public transport are not crimes that should result in non custodial sentence, despite the youth or good prospects of the Accused.

13. Accordingly, I sentence both the Accused as follows;-

(i) First Accused – 4 years 9 months 3 weeks imprisonment with non parole period of 3 years 8 months.

(ii) Second Accused – 4 years 1 month 3 weeks imprisonment, with non parole period of 3 years.

28 days to appeal.

Cama M. Tuberi
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE