Police v Peniata [2013] WSSC 141 (11 November 2013)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

Police v Peniata [2013] WSSC 141

Case name:	Police v Peniata
Citation:	[2013] WSSC 141
Decision date:	11 November 2013
Parties:	POLICE and TOETU PENIATA, male of Vailele and Leulumoega-tuai.
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Nelson
On appeal from:
Order:
Representation:	F Lagaaia for prosecution Defendant unrepresented
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE

Prosecution

AND:

TOETU PENIATA, male of Vailele and Leulumoega-tuai.

Defendant

Counsel: F Lagaaia for prosecution

Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 11 November 2013

SENTENCE

1. The defendant faces three counts of burglary and three counts of theft. He is a 20 year old single male of Vailele. He is unemployed and he told the probation office as per page three of his pre-sentence report that he has been disowned by his family and that is why he committed these offence. Because he had no money. The defendant should understand that the way to get money is not steal other peoples property but go out and get a job.
2. The summary of facts from the police which he had admitted says that in relation to the theft committed on Tuesday 21 May 2013 the defendant entered a house at Vaitele went into the bedrooms and stole a $7000 canon camera as well as two perfumes. When the complainant returned home from work she discovered her properties missing and reported it to the police.
3. The summary goes on to say that on Wednesday 29 May he entered another house at Vaivase-uta using an object to force open the locked front door. He entered the house and took a gold watch valued at $290 which he tried to sell to the neighbour of the house. When the owner of the house got home and discovered it had been broken into he reported it to the police. The owners neighbour gave the description of the defendant to the police.
4. On Thursday 04 July 2013 in the early hours of the morning the defendant entered another house at Vaimea through an unlocked kitchen door. This was about 1:00 am in the morning. At that time the owners of the house were asleep in their respective rooms. The defendant went through the house and stole three cell phones, a camera, a wedding ring, wrist watch, handbag, earings, gold necklaces all to a total value of over $2000. This theft was discovered by the owners and also reported to the police.
5. Police investigations were carried out and on about the 6th of July they located the defendant. They went with the defendant to his home at Vailele and a search of the house recovered some of the items stolen in the burglaries. The defendant has been charged with the burglaries and has pleaded guilty. Hence his appearance in court this afternoon for sentence.
6. In mitigation this morning he pleaded with the court for another chance. He said that he would use this chance wisely. The difficulty with that is that this is not the defendans first court appearance for this sort of thing. He has a previous conviction for burglary and theft in May this year where the District Court gave him a sentence of community service. He has a further conviction in September of this year for theft. Again the District Court did not imprison him but gave him a suspended sentence. While he was under this 12 months suspended sentence he committed the present offences. Which means that one of the thing that needs to be done is to send him back to the District Court to be sentenced on those suspended sentences. So when the defendant says that he wants another chance he does not have a lot of credibility behind that request. He has already been given a chance not once but twice by the court. And the probation office tells me in their report that of the 120 hours of community service he was ordered to do he has only done five (5). And they are of the view it is a waste of time to give him another probationary or community service sentence.
7. It is clear from the facts of your case Toetu that you are a predator who breaks into people houses and steals their properties. Then you sell those properties to finance your life style. The public requires protection from people like you. The sad part Toetu is you are only 20 years of age and you are now embarking it would seem on a life of crime. If you carry on that way Toetu, better get used to Tafaigata because that will likely become your permanent home.
8. In respect of the burglary and theft that occurred on the 21st of May the maximum penalty for which is 10 years for burglary and 7 years for the theft. Considering all the relevant circumstances a start point of 3 years in prison is appropriate. For your guilty plea which has saved the necessity of a trial I will deduct from that one-third of your sentence a period of one (1) year leaves a balance of 2 years. To reflect the fact that there has been partial recovery of some of the properties stolen I will deduct 6 months from that balance leaving 18 months in prison. I note that was recovered by you in co-operation with the police. You are therefore well entitled to that deduction. There are no other deductions Toetu that you qualify for.
9. For the burglary that occurred on the 21st of May 2013 you will be convicted and sentenced to 18 months in prison. Like wise for the theft that occurred that day 18 months imprisonment but terms to run concurrent. Normally that penalty would be upgraded to reflect a defendants previous convictions. But in your case I note that you have to now go back to the District Court on your suspended sentence so I will waive that for your case.
10. In respect of the burglary and theft of the 29th of May considering that all you stole on that occasion was a $290 gold watch, you will be convicted and sentenced each charge to a period of three months in prison. Terms concurrent to each other but cumulative to the 18 months as per above.
11. In respect of the final burglary and theft that occurred on the 4th of July 2013 you will be convicted and sentenced in respect of that burglary and theft to 18 months in prison for each charge. Terms to run concurrent to each other. But again because that involves a different burglary and theft that term will be cumulative to your other terms.
12. The final thing that needs to be done for your matter is to transfer your file back down to the District Court to deal with the suspended sentence that was imposed on you by that court. O le mataupu lena e toe valaau taeao i luma o le Faamasinoga Faa-itumalo mo se faaiuga e fetaui ai ma le matupu lena Toetu. Ua e malamalama i faasalaga lea ua tuu atu e uiga i mataupu uma ia e faasaga ia oe? (Defendant indicated he understood). O lou taimi sa e nofo taofia ai e faatalitali le mataupu lenei e tatau ona toese mai le taimi lea ua faataatia atu e fai ma ou faasalaga.
    

JUSTICE NELSON