Republic v JE [2016] NRDC 22; Criminal Case 113 of 2013 (7 April 2016)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF NAURU
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 113 of 2013

REPUBLIC

V

JE

Date of hearing 6 April 2016
Date of Sentence 7 April 2016

Mr. Filimoni Lacanivalu for the Republic
Mr. Ravunimase Tangivakatini for the defendant

_________

SENTENCE
_________

1. The defendant pleaded guilty to 1 count of entering a dwelling house with intent to commit a crime therein contrary to section 420 of the Criminal Code 1899 and I count of stealing contrary to section 398 of the Criminal Code 1899. The defendant committed the offence on the 24 April 2010 and was 17 years old at the time he offended.
   
2. The complaint against the defendant was not registered with the court until 23 June 2013.^[1] The prosecution has not given any explanation to the court for the delay of three years, 2 months and 1 day it took for the complaint to be filed with the court.
   
3. In court, the prosecution has not given any explanation as to why it took another two years, 9 months and 11 days took to bring this matter to some finality.
   
4. A perusal of the court file reveal that the matter was first brought before the court on 16 July 2013 and a bench warrant was issued by the court to have the defendant arrested and brought before the court.^[2]
   
5. The defendant never came before the court until 26 August 2015 when he appeared in court and this matter was adjourned to the 9 September 2015 for plea. The defendant did not appear in court on the 9 September 2015 and a bench warrant was again issued by the court on the 9 September 2015. The bench warrant was executed by the police 23^rd March 2016 and the defendant was arrested and brought before the court and this matter was adjourned to 6 April 2016 when he pleaded guilty to both charges.
   
6. The prosecution has not given any explanation to the court for the failure to execute the bench warrants issued by the court from 16 July 2013 until 26 August 2015 and again from 9 September 2015 until 23^rd March 2016. The court must in this case raise its concern regarding the failure to execute the bench warrants issued which are court orders. It is clear from the history of this matter that the failure to execute the bench warrants has also contributed to the delay in bringing this matter to finality. The court, the prosecution, the police and the defense do not do and serve justice to the community when avoidable delays are not avoided as has happened in this case.
   
7. The defendant has pleaded guilty and is a first offender. At the time he offended he was 17 years old. He is still entitled to be sentenced as a juvenile offender. He is now 22 years old and is in a de-facto relationship and resides at Aiwo with his partner and child. The defendant is not employed. The goods stolen had been returned and there was partial restitution for the goods although the court has not been informed about the amount. The failure to explain the delay in the circumstances of this case must mitigate in favor of reduction in sentence.
   
8. Entering a dwelling house in the night is a serious breach of privacy. The home is where people are supposed to be safe. Had this matter been dealt with earlier I would have no hesitation in imposing an immediate custodial sentence.
   
9. I exercise the courts discretion to sentence the defendant to keep the peace and be of good behavior for 6 months at a sum of $50.00.
   

Dated this 7 day of April 2016

Emma Garo

Resident Magistrate

---

^[1] Charge filed with District Court dated 23 June 2013
^[2] Record of District Court proceedings 16 July 2013