Police v Amituanai [2011] WSSC 61 (14 March 2011)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

THE POLICE
Informant

AND:

LUKI AMITUANAI aka LUKI TIA AMI,\
male of Foua Salelologa.
Defendant

Counsels: Ms R Titi and Ms F E Niumata for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 14 March 2011

SENTENCE

The summary of facts which the defendant has admitted states that he is a 35 year old male of Foua Salelologa married with four children, employed as a carpenter. On 08 February 2011 the police received information from an informant that the defendant had marijuana on his property in a talie tree.

Pursuant to a search warrant the police visited and searched the property but discovered that the defendant was not there. They subsequently went looking for the defendant and having found him returned with him to the property. They inspected the talie tree growing beside the defendants house and found hidden amongst the branches of the tree a black bucket. Inside the bucket they discovered a marijuana plant being grown measuring 3 feet by 42 inches tall. The defendant was arrested and charged and has pleaded guilty to cultivation of this plant charge number S97/11.

I am sure Luki has heard my comments in relation to the previous sentencing matter today of Police v Falaniko and the policies of the court. The same considerations and remarks in relation to dealers and distributors also applies to growers of marijuana or those who cultivate the plant. And the reason is self evident. Without growers there would be no marijuana available for dealers, pushers and consumers. The growers are the father and mother of the drug trade. And they can therefore expect a severe penalty of imprisonment to be imposed for their activities. However the penalty depends on the circumstances of each case.

In this case there was only one plant. The defendant has told the probation office it was for personal use and there is no evidence before me to indicate otherwise. The probation office report also records that a large fine was imposed on the defendant by the village council. The court must again applaud the actions and support of village councils for they too must play their part in the war against drugs. And the general public should make no mistake we are in a war against drugs and drug offending and the evils that it spawns. I also note that Luki is a first offender who has pleaded guilty.

What all these means is although you must go to prison because of the policy pertaining to marijuana offending these factors mean only for a short term. But while this time it may be short Luki, you continue to grow marijuana and you come back before the court again the time will not be anywhere near as short as today. Ua manino lea tulaga Luki? (defendant indicated he understood).

The defendants sentence starts at 18 months in prison. I deduct one-third for his guilty plea leaving a balance of 12 months. From that I deduct 6 months because this is Lukis first offence leaving a balance of 6 months. From that I deduct half which is 3 months to take into account the penalty of the village council in this matter. That leaves a balance of 3 months. For this matter Luki will be convicted and sentenced to 3 months in prison. In relation to charge S98/11 and S99/11 those are duplicate charges, they are dismissed.

............................
JUSTICE NELSON