State v Hiafrie (No 2) [2008] PGNC 56; N3366 (25 April 2008)

N3366

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR 1071 OF 2006

THE STATE

V

TERENCE YABOK HIAFRIE (No. 2)
Prisoner

Wewak: Davani .J
2008: 24, 25 April

CRIMINAL LAW – Armed robbery on a street – bush knife used – prisoner accompanied by one other – trial conducted – 8 years appropriate.

Facts

After a trial, the prisoner was found guilty of aggravated armed robbery. The robbery occurred at Wewak when 2 female employees of Wewak Haus Bet Ltd who were on their way by foot, to the bank to deposit takings of K19,360.00, were accosted by the prisoner and one other, who brandished a bush knife at them, slapped the female employee who held the money bag, grabbed the money bag, then ran off.

Held:

Prisoner is sentenced to 8 years in hard labour. Sentence reduced by time spent in custody awaiting trial.

Cases cited:

Gimble v the State [1988-89] PNGLR 271;
Dudley Henry Gorap v the State (2003) Unreported Supreme Court Judgment;
Kennedy Kara v the State (2006) SCR 51 of 2005;

Counsel:

L. Rangan, for the State
M. Mwawesi and F. Kirriwom, for the Prisoner

SENTENCE

24 April, 2008

1. DAVANI .J: After a trial, I found the prisoner guilty of the offence of aggravated armed robbery, charge laid pursuant to s. 326 (1) (2) of the Criminal Code Act (6;CCA7;).

Evidence

2. ټOn 2;On A4th A4th Apth April, 2006, the prisoner and one other, whilst armed with a bush knife, accosted and held up 2 female employees of Wewak Haus Bet Ltd, making off with K19,360.00. Thloyeee walto the the ANZ BANZ Bank tank to bank the monies when they were held up.

Analysis of evidence and the law

4. &The maximum term of imprismprisonment for aggravated armed robbery is life, subject to the court’s sentencing discretion under s. 19 of the CCA. This discretion must be guided by proper principles of sentencing guidelines as to range of sentence that apply to facts of each case.

5. &##160; Both couh counsel rederretome to Gimble v the State [1988 – 89] PNGLR 271 where the Supreme Court first enunciated the proper approach to sentencing in robbery cases andestedeliner streestreet robbery, as is the case here, GimblGimble (sue (supra) suggested a starting point of 3 years in a contested case involving young first offenders carrying weapons and threatening violence.

6. &ـIn a stra street roet robbery of the worst kind where a tourist couple were severely beaten by the guide and who later robbed them, the Supreme Court redthe tcourt’s sentence of 20 years as being excesexcessive,sive, to 18 years (Dudley Henry Gorap v the State (2003) Unreported Supreme Court Judgment).

7. Aun co reelrredeme to KenneKennedy Kara v the State (2006) SCR 51 of 2005, Supreme Court decision dated 30th August, 2006 where a sentence of 11 years on a guilty plea to street robbery was redto 7 . In case, a sum of K3of K30.00 0.00 in cain cash, a pair of sandals, a wrist watch, towel and other personal belongings were taken. The accused in that case was armed with a bush knife and was in the company of other persons. They exhibited violence by pointing the bush knife at the victim’s neck and struggled with him before they made their escape.

8. Is thie, ase sahe violent tent tendencies were exhibited to the victims in that the female who was holding the money bag, had a bnife ed atafterh sheslapped and the money bag taken off her.

9.&p>9. #160;&#160  &#he prisoneearepeared not not to be genuine in his remorse, only saying one sentence being ‘I am sorry to the court and ask for its mercy.’ Tog with is tct this court had to run a trial tial to esto establisablish guih guilt. The aggravating factors far outweigh the mitigating factors.

10. &#1find a at tenentence of e of 8 years is appropriate under the circumstances, to be deducted from period of pre-trial custody of 1 year, 11 months and 2 weeks. The prisoner shall serve the reduced period of 6 years, 1 month and 2 weeks in hard labour.

__________________________________

Public Prosecutor: Lawyer for the State
Public Solicitor: Lawyer for the Prisoner