Police v Feesago [2010] WSSC 32 (21 June 2010)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

GEORGE FEESAGO
male of Siusega
Defendant

Presiding Judge: Justice Vaai

Counsel: M G Patu for the prosecution
Mr T S Toailoa for defendant

Sentence: 21 June 2010

SENTENCE

1. After a defended hearing I found the defendant guilty on two charges of possession of narcotics. A plastic bag containing dried marijuana leaves was in of the pockets of his pants and the other bag containing stalks, leaves and seeds of marijuana was found in the drivers door of the car he was driving.

2. The defendant is 32 years, married, has 1 child, his second child is expected later in the year. He is a businessman.

3. The defendant has been under police surveillance, for a period of time as a suspect in the illicit drug trade. A trade which if it did exist was kept secret from his wife, family and others who held him in high esteem.

4. The defendant was a suspected dealer in methamphetamine or ice as it is commnly known. When he was followed by police and arrested, ice was found on his companion. For the purpose of this sentence, I will focus only on the drugs found on his body and inside his car.

5. Drug offending, as this court had repeatedly voiced on many occasions, is a serious offence which is normally met by a custodial sentence. Its prevalence invites deterrent sentence. Society’s denunciation of drug offending must be conveyed to the defendant and other like minded people by the imposition of stern sentences.

6. And sterner sentence is warranted when a defendant is in possession for a commercial purpose. Large quantities of drug will always trigger the inference that the defendant is dealing in that particular drug.

7. In this case the prosecution is contending that the defendant was in possession of marijuana for a commercial purpose. Quantity of drugs found in possession of the defendant is the basis of the prosecution contention. Total weight of the marijuana was 13.4 grams which the prosecution suggests was a substantial quantity which manifests a commercial intent

8. With due respect to the prosecution the total weight of 13.4 grams includes the 3 stalks which are significantly hearvier than marijuana leaves and seeds which means the true weight of the illegal drug is substantially less than 13.4 grams. It follows that I cannot accept that the defendant was in possession for a commercial purpose.

9. The accused according to the several testimonials is a dedicated father and husband, a hardworking and self-motivated businessman. Both he and his wife come from hardworking and respected families.

10. I accept the defendant is truly remorseful. I am satisfied that this is one of those cases which justifies a departure from the normal custodial sentence which the court normally imposes. The penality which the court will impose must nonetheless be severe to reflect the seriousness of the offence. I will also bear in mind that a drug analyst was brought over from New Zealand to testify.

11. I have considered a community based sentence however I am confident that your parents, your wife and your family members are capable and willing to give you the guidance and help that you need.

12. For these two offences the defendant is convicted and fined $1, 000.00. He is also ordered to pay prosecution costs of $2, 000.00. Both amounts are to be paid by Friday 25th June 2010 before 4:00 pm in default the defendant will serve 3 months imprisonment.

JUSTICE VAAI