State v Rimbao [2019] PGNC 353; N8047 (16 August 2019)

N8047

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR No. 473 OF 2018

THE STATE

V

WALLY RIMBAO

Waigani: Koeget, J
2019: 16^th August

CRIMINAL LAW- Indictable offence – robbery pursuant to section 386 (1), (2)(a)(b) of the Criminal Code Act chapter 262 – sentence on guilty plea – Exercise of court’s discretionary powers under section 19 of the code – pre-trial custodial period substituted for sentence imposed.

FACT

On 13^th November 2018, the accused armed with a bush knife went to Max Umbu’s Pams Convenient trade store located at Telikom compound at North Waigani, in the National Capital District and held up the shop keeper and stole cash in the sum of K620-00 the property of Max Umbu.

He fled the scene in a taxi and the matter was reported to the police resulting in his apprehension.

The accused pleaded guilty to the charge and so he was convicted accordingly.

Case Cited:

Gimble –v- The State [1988-1989]
The State –v- Loa Vi (2006) N3384
The State –v- Roy (2007) N5041
The State –v- Dickson Kauboi (2001) CR No 495/2001, 07.06.06
Anis –v- The State PGSC 12 of 2000

Counsel:

H. Roalokona and G. Gunson, for the State
Ms A. Peter, for the Accused

16^th August, 2019

1. KOEGET J: INTRODUCTION: The accused is charged with one count of Armed Robbery pursuant to section 386(1), (2)(a) (b) of the Criminal Code Act.

ISSUE

What is the appropriate sentence the court should imposed upon him?

PERSONAL PARTICULARS

2. He is 32 years of age and is married with two children. Both children reside with their mother at the family residence in Port Moresby. He is a carpenter by profession but unemployed at the time up til now.

AGGRAVITING FACTORS

3. A weapon was used in the commission of the offence. Such offence is prevalent in Port Moresby and the country.

MITIGATING FACTORS

4. He is a first time offender. He spent 9 months and 4 days in custody awaiting disposal of the case. He rendered services to the complainant when he carried maintenance work on the complainant’s residence at Gordons Estate and incurred personal expenses of K2,500.00. The complainant has not paid him for services rendered nor settled the personal expenses incurred to the date of the offence.

5. He pleaded guilty to the charge and saved valuable time of the court.

SENTENCE

6. The prisoner is a relative of the complainant. He provided services to the complainant when he carried out maintenance on the dwelling house and has not been paid for that work. The prisoner incurred personal expenses of K2,500-00 and the amount remain outstanding to the date of the commission of the offence.

7. He approached the complainant on many occasions prior to commission of the offence to settle his claim and personal expenses, but the complainant did not respond favourably.

8. There was option for the prisoner to institute civil proceedings against the complainant in the lower court which he did not utilise. His actions depict uncivilised means of obtaining his dues. He is still owed monies by the complainant and in my view imposition of a further custodial period will be injustice. He has spent 9 months 4 days in custody awaiting disposal of the case.

9. In my view, an imposition of a short term of imprisonment would be fair in the circumstances.

10. So the prisoner is sentenced to be imprisoned for 9 months and 9 days. The pre-trial custodial period is substituted for the sentence and so he is to be discharged from custody immediately.

ORDER

(1) He is sentenced to be imprisoned for 9 months and 4 days in hard labour.

(2) The pre-trial custodial period is substituted for the sentence so he is to be released from custody forthwith.

Accordingly ordered.
____________________________________________________________
Public Prosecutor: Lawyer for the State
Public Solicitor: Lawyer for the Accused