Police v Pulelasi [2016] WSDC 16 (29 April 2016)

DISTRICT COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Pulelasi [2016] WSDC 16

Case name:	Police v Pulelasi
Citation:	[2016] WSDC 16
Decision date:	29 April 2016
Parties:	POLICE v MELILA PULELASI male of Nono’a Saleimoa
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):	D382/16
Jurisdiction:	CRIMINAL
Place of delivery:	District Court Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	District Court Judge Clarke
On appeal from:
Order:	- Taking into account all the circumstances of your offending including your early guilty plea, you are convicted and fined $1,500.00. The fine is to be paid within 7 days, in default, 8 weeks imprisonment.
Representation:	Mr O Tagaloa for National Prosecutions Office Defendant in person
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Liquor Act 1971/4(1).
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Informant

A N D

MELILA PULELASI male of Nono’a Saleimoa.
Defendant

Counsel:
Mr O Tagaloa for National Prosecutions Office
Defendant in person

Decision : 29 April 2016

SENTENCING OF DCJ CLARKE

The Charge.

1. Melila Pulelasi, you appear for sentence on 1 charge of unlawfully manufacturing liquor namely home brew without a licence from the Minister of Revenue in breach of section 42(1) and 42(2) of the Liquor Act 2011 which carries a maximum penalty of 6 months imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $5,000.00.
2. You entered a guilty plea at an early stage.

The Offending

3. The Summary of Facts accepted by you is that on the 27^th December 2015, you were reported to Police because you were selling home brew to teenagers in your village of Nonoa Saleimoa. On the 28^th of December 2015 at approximately 4.30pm, Police officers executed a search warrant on your house. You were not home but Police found two (2) buckets of home brew hidden behind the faleo’o at the back of your house. You were apprehended that day and taken to Afega Police Station.
4. You told the Court that you had only been making home brew for a month and selling it to the ‘tupulaga’. You told the Court that you didn’t want to make the home brew because you had been to prison before but it was given to you by your brother-in-law to make the home brew to sell.

Background of the defendant

5. You are a 45 year old male of Nonoa, Saleimoa. You are married with 8 children. You are employed as a carpenter at Filiga located at Vaivase-Uta.
6. You have previous convictions for a different kind of offending, namely cultivation and possession of narcotics. These date back to 1999.

Aggravating features of the offending

7. The aggravating features of your offending are:
   • (a) Your offending was ongoing and continued for a period of at least 1 month, if not more. It was therefore not an isolated activity but an ongoing enterprise that you repeated over that period;

(b) It was premeditated and for a commercial purpose. You manufactured the liquor for the express purpose of sale to the youths of your village to make money;

(c) The liquor was sold to teenagers who obviously are under-age and should not have been consuming alcohol;

(d) You knew that the manufacture and sale by you of the home brew was illegal yet you disregarded the law and manufactured the home brew in any event; and

(e) You attempted to conceal your manufacture of the illegal home brew by hiding it behind the faleo’o.

Mitigating features of the offending

8. There are no mitigating factors in your offending.

Aggravating features in respect of the offender

9. I note that you have prior convictions for different types of offending from 1999. Given these offences were almost 17 years ago and for a different type of offence I will not place weight on these prior convictions.

Mitigating features in respect of the offender

10. You entered a guilty plea at the first available opportunity. When given the opportunity to address the Court in mitigation, you however expressed no remorse for your offending.

Discussion

11. The Prosecution has filed a Sentencing Memorandum. The various cases referred to by Prosecution resulted in either a fine or conviction and discharge. In no case cited was a defendant sentenced to imprisonment. Imprisonment is also not in the circumstances of your case warranted or appropriate.
12. The appropriate penalty for you in the circumstances of your case is a fine. What is left for the Court to determine is therefore the quantum of the fine. The maximum fine under the Liquor Act 2011 for this type of offending is $5,000.00. Firstly, the quantum of the fine is aggravated by the fact that you produced home brew for commercial sale. You profited financially from the manufacture of the home brew produced and so the fine must take into account your commercial purpose and the financial gain made by you from your illegal commercial enterprise. Secondly, your sale of the home brew was to teenagers and the youth of your village being persons under the age of 21 years of age. Both these factors are particularly aggravating factors in addition to those I have highlighted earlier.

Sentence

13. Taking into account all the circumstances of your offending including your early guilty plea, you are convicted and fined $1,500.00. The fine is to be paid within 7 days, in default, 8 weeks imprisonment.
    

JUDGE LEIATAUALESA D M CLARKE