State v Vakatalai - Sentence [2016] FJMC 128; Criminal Case 912.2016 (30 August 2016)

IN THE MAGISTRATES’ COURT OF FIJI

AT SUVA

Criminal Case No: - 912 /2016

STATE

V

TEVITA VAKATALAI

For the Prosecution : WPC Kalara

The Accused : In person

Date of Judgment : 30^th of August 2016

Date of Sentence : 30^th of August 2016

SENTENCE

1. TEVITA VAKATALAI, you were convicted this morning to one count of Robbery contrary to section 310(1) (a) of the Crimes Decree No 44 of 2009.
2. During the hearing it was proved that on 04^th June 2016 after clubbing the complainant came out of Onyx night club and was checking emails in his I Phone when you came behind and grabbed his phone. Even though he grabbed your shirt, you managed to escape after a struggle and later when you came back to the scene he recognized you and informed the police which led to the arrest.

3. Under the Crimes Decree the maximum penalty for Robbery is 14 years imprisonment.
4. In Rarawa v State [2015] FJHC 324 introducing new tariff for this offence his Lordship Justice Madigan said :

“To facilitate sentencing for robbery simpliciter, it would be appropriate to apply two tariffs one for robberies accompanied by violent force should be in the range of 8 to 14 years (in recognition of the lower maximum penalty applied to robbery by the legislature as opposed to the penalty for aggravated robbery). The general tariff for robbery, not accompanied by violence, can then be visited with sentences in the range of two to seven years.”

5. In Koroivuki v. State [2013] FJCA 15; AAU 0018.2010 (5 March 2013) his Lordship Justice Suresh Chandra said:

"In selecting a starting point, the court must have regard to an objective seriousness of the offence. No reference should be made to the mitigating and aggravating factors at this stage. As a matter of good practice, the starting point should be picked from the lower or middle range of the tariff. After adjusting for the mitigating and aggravating factors, the final term should fall within the tariff. If the final term falls either below or higher than the tariff, then the sentencing court should provide reasons why the sentence is outside the range."
6. Considering the gravity of offending and your culpability the in my view starting point need to be selected from the middle end of the tariff in this case.
7. Hence I select 04 years as the starting point in this case.
8. This was committed in a public place when the people were coming out from clubbing. This I consider as aggravating factor and add 03 years to reach 07 years imprisonment.
9. In your mitigation you said you are 27 years old, single. You still deny committing this offence which would show the lack of remorse on your part and failure to still admit the offence.
10. You are not a first offender and not entitle for discount for your character.
11. For the mitigating factors I deduct 01 year to reach 06 years imprisonment.
12. You are in custody for nearly 03 months and pursuant to section 24 of the Sentencing and Penalties Decree I deduct that period to reach 05 years 09 months imprisonment.
13. Public come to the night clubs after a busy week for relaxing and expect to enjoy their time. But they have been subject to violence by people like you who roam around the street in the night waiting like vultures for their prey. Hence severe sentences need to be passed in cases like this to protect the public and deter these offences from happening in future.

14. TEVITA VAKATALAI, I sentence you to 05 years 09 months imprisonment to one count of Robbery contrary to section 310(1) (a) of the Crimes Decree No 44 of 2009 with a non-parole period of 05 years.
15. 28 days to appeal

Shageeth Somaratne

Resident Magistrate