State v Joel [1996] PGDC 8; DC9 (18 November 1996)

Unreported District Court Decisions

[1997] PNGDC 15 - STATE V JOHNNY JOEL

[1997] PNGDC 15

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE]

CASE NO 69 OF 1996

THE STATE

V

JOHNNY JOEL

Kavieng

Karapo PM

18 November 1996

SENTENCE - Break, enter and stealing - Relevant considerations - Youthfulness of offender - Seriousness of offence

Counsel

S/C Dau for Police

Johnny Joel appears in person.

SENTENCE

18 November 1996

KARAPO PM:  You have pleaded guilty to this charge, that is you broke into a building at Utu High School, and therein, you stole a carton of rubber tubes worth K315.00, the properties belonging to Utu High School, and that it is contrary to Section 398(a)(1) of the Criminal Code, Ch. No. 262.  This offence carries a maximum imprisonment sentence of 5 years.

The brief facts says that, on the 10th October, 1996 between 11.00 PM and 4.00 am, you went with two friends to Utu High School.  While at Utu you and your two friends ripped off the fibro wall and entered into the building.  The building is used as a hardware by the school.  While inside the building, you removed a carton of rubber tubes, patches and a battery.  The value of the property removed was K373.00.  You were arrested a few days later and charged for break and entering.

In your allocatus, you asked the Court for leniency on the following grounds:

N2>1.       You are over 16 years old and attended Maiom Primary School.

N2>2.       From the beginning of the investigation of this matter you had co-operated very well with the Police investigators.

N2>3.       You pleaded guilty to this offence which made it more easier for the Court and Police.

N2>4.       You said you were sorry for what you have done.

In my opinion you have committed a serious offence.  You broke into a building and stole some things from there in.  You have not given any reasons as to why you committed the offence.  There is no evidence of the stolen property before this Court and whether the properties were returned or not.

However, it is the Court’s duty to consider the most appropriate punishment that would go towards creating peace with the community and at the same time discouraging people or future offenders from committing this offence.  I consider that the sentence should not cause enormous damage not only to the offender but to the community.

In your record of interview, you said you were alone and played a leading role in the breaking.  I take into consideration your youthfulness and some other factors.  These does not mean I will ignore the seriousness of the offence.  It is my responsibility to recognize both terrible effects on the young people in Papua New Guinea goals.

I therefore consider the most appropriate sentence in your case as:

N2>1.       The prisoner is convicted and sentence to be imprisonment at Kavieng CIS for the term of 8 months.

N2>2.       The 8 months imprisonment is wholly suspended and the defendant is placed on 12 months good behaviour bond without surety.

N2>3.       The prisoner will appear if called upon during the period of 12 months before this Court to receive sentence which was suspended if any of the conditions are not complied with.

S/C Dau for the Police

Johnny Joel appears in person for himself