IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

DANNY HUNT male of Vaitoloa
Accused

Counsel: T Toailoa for prosecution
S K Ainuu for accused 

Sentence: 26 September 2011

SENTENCE

The charge

1.	The accused appears for sentence on one charge of possession of narcotics in which he is jointly charged with three co-accused. He originally pleaded not guilty to the charge but on the morning of the trial he changed his plea to one of guilty on advice of his counsel.

2.	The accused is being sentenced today because the prosecution wants to call him as a witness against the other three co-accused who have maintained their not guilty pleas. 

The offending 

3.	The brief facts of this matter as it appears form the prosecution's summary of facts are that in the evening of 22 February 2011, the accused and his three co-accused travelled in the accused's car driven by the accused from Vaitoloa and stopped at the Fugalei market. They then continued to Sogi where a police patrol noticed the accused's car swerving on the road. The police then pulled over the car to the side of the road.

4.	When the car stopped, a passenger in the car threw out the marijuana joint that was picked up by one of the police officers. The police then searched the car and found a small plastic packet containing dried marijuana leaves in the space between the driver's seat and the front passenger's seat. The marijuana leaves were later found to weigh 2.5g

5.	According to what the accused told the probation service, when he and his co-accused stopped at Fugalei he got out to fix one of his friends car. He then saw his co-accused who were still inside his car took out a marijuana joint and smoked it. He told them not to smoke the stuff in his car. Afterwards, they continued to Sogi where they were stopped by the police.

6.	The accused denies that he owned the small plastic packet of dried marijuana leaves found by the police in his car. He says that he is sure that one of his co-accused must have planted the packet of marijuana leaves between his seat and the front passenger's seat.

7.	There is nothing in the summary of facts to contradict what the accused told the probation service. If there is any doubt in this regard as to the extent of the accused's culpability it would have to be resolved in favour of the accused.

The accused 

8.	According to the summary of facts the accused is 25 years. He is a first offender. He has also pleaded guilty to the charge against him.

9.	The probation report shows that the accused is married and is a well qualified chef and has two jobs as a chef, one during the day and one at night, at two different restaurants. The character testimonials from the priest of the accused's church, the pulenuu of his village, and one of his employers show the accused as a person of good character.

Mitigating factors.

10.	The mitigating factors in this case are the accused's plea of guilty though somewhat belated and the fact that the accused had been a person of good character until the commission of this offence. Another mitigating factor is that the accused is willing to be called as a witness for the prosecution in the trial of his co-accused. I also bear in mind the small quantity of marijuana substances found in the accused's car and the personal circumstances of the accused as set out in the probation report.

The decision 
11.	Having regard to all the circumstances including the mitigating factors, I have decided to impose a term of probation. The accused is sentenced to 12 months probation. As a special condition of his probation he is to perform 70 hours of community service as directed by the probation service.

CHIEF JUSTICE

Solicitor
Attorney-General's Office, Apia for prosecution
Ainuu Law Firm for accused