Police v Valuniu [2017] WSDC 2 (11 April 2017)

DISTRICT COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Valuniu [2017] WSDC 2

Case name:	Police v Valuniu
Citation:	[2017] WSDC 2
Decision date:	11 April 2017
Parties:	Police v Valuniu male of Fasitootai and Iamanu male of Moataa (
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):	D4402/16
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	In the District Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Judge Fepuleai Ameperosa Roma
On appeal from:
Order:	(i) Ata is convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment, time in custody to be deducted from the sentence; (ii) Tai is convicted and placed on supervision for a period of 12 months with a condition that you also complete 100 hours community work.
Representation:	Sgt K. Stanley for Prosecution Both defendants Unrepresented
Catchwords:	Theft – aggravating factors – mitigating factors – sentencing principles
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013 s33, 161 & 165 (b), Community Justice Act 2007, Sentencing Act 2016
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN
POLICE

Informant
AND

ATAATAOTAULELEIA VINE VALUNIU, male of Fasitootai

AND

TAI IAMANU, male of Moataa
Defendants

Counsel:
Sgt K. Stanley for National Prosecution Office
Both Defendants Unrepresented

Sentence: 11^th April 2017

ORAL SENTENCING REMARKS OF JUDGE ROMA

Charge

1. You appear this afternoon for sentence on one joint charge of theft pursuant to sections 161, 165 (b) and 33 of the Crimes Act 2013. The maximum penalty is 7 years imprisonment.
2. For Ataataotauleleia (“Ata”), he entered a guilty plea on 27 March 2017 when brought to Court under a warrant issued on 11 November 2016 when the charge was first called and he failed to appear.
3. In respect of Tai, he denied the charge at first. On 30 January 2017 when evidence was to be called, he vacated and substituted his not guilty plea with one of guilty.

Offending

4. According to the brief prosecution summary, you both went to the complainant’s house on 12 September 2016 and stole 3 lawn mowers, valued in total at $3,700.00.
5. In your respective pre sentence reports, you blame each other for what you did. On one hand, Ata says that you paddled in Tai’s canoe through mangroves looking for firewood. Tai told you to paddle towards the complainant’s house. He then told you to go and get the 3 lawnmowers which were inside the complainant’s house. Ata further says that when you returned, you both tried to sell the lawnmowers. You did not find any buyer and you threw away the stolen items.
6. On the other hand, Tai says that he was preparing to go out to fish that evening when Ata came by and asked to come with him to get the lawnmowers. He helped Ata bring the lawnmowers before he went back fishing. The following morning when he checked, the lawnmowers were missing and so was Ata.
7. Despite the differences in version, it is clear that you both knew it was someone else’s properties, and that you were depriving that person of such properties by taking them without her knowledge and consent.

Complainant

8. The complainant is a 67 year old unemployed female of Moataa. The pre sentence reports say that you have not apologised to her. There is also nothing before the Court to say that the stolen items have been recovered.

Defendants

9. Ata is 32 years of age and single, and the older of the 2 of you. You live at Fasitoo but were visiting your mother’s family at Moataa where your offending took place. You have been in custody since 16 February 2017. You are also a first offender.
10. Tai is 20 years of age. You are now married and when the pre sentence report was prepared, you and your wife were expecting the birth of your first child. At the time of offending, you were living at Moataa with your mother’s family. You have since moved to Gagaifo, Lefaga where you live and support your family by fishing. Your family relies on you for sustenance and the testimonials speak highly of your character. You are also a first offender.

Aggravating factors relating to your offending.

11. The following are aggravating factors relating to your offending:
    • (i) Planning and premeditation – you paddled into the mangroves and headed for the complainant’s house where you took 3 lawnmowers which you brought back in the canoe;
    • (ii) Unlawful entry of a building – according to the material before me, the complainant’s house was locked. Ata broke into the house and stole the items;
    • (iii) Impact on victim – the total value of the stolen items ($3,700.00.00) is a significant sum, and none of the items were recovered;

Mitigating factors relating to your offending

12. There are no mitigating factors relating to your offending, though in relation to culpability, I consider that Ata was the one who entered the complainant’s house and removed her properties.

Aggravating features relating to you as an offenders

13. There are no aggravating features relating to you as offenders.

Mitigating features relating to you as offenders

14. I take into account your guilty pleas, though yours Tai was entered late when evidence was to be called.
15. I take into account also your respective personal circumstances and the fact that you are first offenders.

Sentencing principles

16. I am guided in passing sentence by the Community Justice Act 2007 and the recently enacted Sentencing Act 2016. The latter states the purposes of sentencing, the most relevant in my view in this case being accountability, denunciation and deterrence.
17. Previous comparable cases also provide guidance, some of which are referred to in the sentencing memorandum of prosecution. I am particularly mindful of the prevalence of this type of offending in the community as seen in the increasing number of cases coming before the Court.
18. I bear in mind that the stolen properties have not been recovered and no apology has been rendered or at least an attempt at it.
19. I find in the circumstances that a custodial sentence is warranted.
20. For Ata, I adopt a starting point of 12 months as recommended by Prosecution. I deduct 3 months for your personal circumstances including the fact that you are a first offender. I deduct a further 5 months for your early guilty plea. Your end sentence is 4 months imprisonment.
21. For Tai, I consider your involvement lesser compared to Ata. I accept that you assisted Ata in getting to the complainant’s house and bringing back the items before you went back fishing. You did not go looking to sell the items. You found them missing from where they were kept when you returned from fishing. I accept your explanation that that was the reason why you denied the charge at first. You have a young family who are dependent on you for support.
22. In your circumstances, I have decided not to impose a custodial but a community based sentence.

Result

23. For the above reasons, I sentence you as follows:
    • (i) Ata, you are convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment, time in custody to be deducted from the sentence;
    • (ii) Tai, you are convicted and placed on supervision for a period of 12 months with a condition that you also complete 100 hours community work.

JUDGE FEPULEAI AMEPEROSA ROMA