Police v Chadrick [2014] WSSC 127 (7 April 2014)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Su’a [2014] WSSC 127

Case name:	Police v Chadrick
Citation:	[2014] WSSC 127
Decision date:	07 April 2014
Parties:	Police (Prosecution) Valerie Baby To’iloto Chadrick, female of Savalalo and Luatuanuu. (First Defendant) AND Petelo To’iloto, male of Savalalo and Luatuanuu (Second Defendant)
Hearing date(s):	-
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Nelson
On appeal from:
Order:	For this offending therefore Valerie will be convicted and sentenced to 3 years in prison cumulative to her present term of imprisonment. In respect of the offence of possession of 4.1 grams enough to yield 6 marijuana joints you will be convicted and placed on supervision of the probation office for a period of 12 months. During that period you will undertake 100 hours community services as directed by the probation office under the community service program at the times and as directed by the probation office. There will also Petelo be other terms and conditions of your supervision but I am going to order that the office prepare a probation report on you and file a recommendation to the court as to the conditions that you are to also undertake or also abide by. Your case will be adjourned to the 19th of May for that probation report to be prepared and submitted. But because your supervision commences immediately Petelo you are to report to the probation office twice a week.
Representation:	G Nelson for prosecution T K Enari for both defendants
Catchwords:	-
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

VALERIE BABY TO’ILOTO CHADRICK, female of Savalalo and Luatuanuu.
First Defendant

AND:

PETELO TO’ILOTO, male of Savalalo and Luatuanuu.
Second Defendant

Counsel: G Nelson for prosecution
T K Enari for both defendants

Sentence: 07 April 2014

SENTENCE

3. The two defendants are brother and sister. The first defendant according to the summary of facts from the police has been charged with possession of a substantial quantity of narcotics comprising marijuana leaves and marijuana seeds. She is Valerie Chadrick 22 years old of Savalalo in a defacto relationship with two children and is currently serving an imprisonment term at Tafaigata for possession of marijuana. Her brother is Petelo To’iloto 20 year old male of Savalalo also in a defacto relationship and at the time of this offending was staying with the first defendant at Savalalo. He however has only been charged with possession of three (3) packets of marijuana estimated to be sufficient to yield six (6) joints.
4. The police summary says that on Friday, 8^th November 2013 the police received information that the occupants of the defendants house at Savalalo were selling marijuana. They were also reported to be smoking the narcotics. The police responded to the call and raided the house. As they approached they saw Petelo seated on a chair inside the front. They informed him they were conducting a search for suspected narcotics on the premises. They noted that when they got close to Petelo he took off his shirt and put it beside him. The first action the police took was to search the shirt and that is where they found the 4.1 grams of marijuana estimated to yield six joints.
5. The police party continued searching the premises and they discovered the first defendant Valerie had thrown her bag out of the room and fled. Inspection of the bag disclosed one hundred and ninety two (192) seeds of marijuana together with eighteen (18) branches of marijuana weighing 142.1 grams and an assortment of marijuana leaves weighing 18.7 grams. A search of Valerie’s room found another bag containing four (4) small plastic bags with 6 grams of marijuana leaves as well as some cash. Total weight of the marijuana leaves and branches that are said to belong to Valerie is 156.8 grams estimated by the police to be enough to produce 238 joints of marijuana. It is possession of those narcotics that Valerie has pleaded guilty to.
6. Valerie now through her counsel has stated to the court that the marijuana actually does not belong to her but belongs to her brother. And that the court must make some allowance for that. The difficulty with that is firstly she pleaded guilty to being knowingly in possession of these narcotics. In other words she has by that guilty plea accepted the drugs are hers. And secondly there is nothing before the court to support her argument that the drugs belong to her brother. The brother has not come forward to support that or filed an affidavit to that effect. In the circumstances the inference the court must draw is that these narcotics belong to her and that she is therefore a major dealer and supplier of marijuana. The location of her family house adjacent to the Savalalo Market no doubts facilitates her activities as a dope dealer. I am reinforced in that conclusion by the fact that she is currently serving a term of imprisonment for marijuana possession. It was while she was awaiting sentence on that matter that the present offending occurred.
7. This young lady shows a complete disregard and disdain for the law relating to prohibited narcotics. Valerie must know by now what the court sentencing policy in relation to marijuana offending is. Prevalence of this sort of offending and the seriousness of it means a term of imprisonment is normally imposed. And if you are involved in the sale and distribution of marijuana or other illicit narcotics you have yourself guaranteed a prison term.
8. The maximum penalty for possession of marijuana is 14 years in prison. Considering all the circumstances of this matter an appropriate start point is 4 years. The prosecution have submitted that should be uplifted to 6 years because of Valeries previous conviction. However that submission cannot be accepted because the offending in this case occurred before she was sentenced. So at the date of this offending she had a clean record. I therefore decline the uplift and treat Valerie as a first offender.
9. In respect of her sentence she is entitled to certain deductions which counsel has referred to which the court will now make. Firstly for her guilty plea. I note however this was not entered at the first reasonable opportunity she therefore does not qualify for a full deduction. But her guilty plea did save some time of the court. In acknowledgment of that I reduce her term by 6 months leaves a balance of 3½ years. She appears for sentence as I have stated as a first offender. From what I have read of the documents before me she has a reasonable background. Counsel has referred to her family situation and also the fact that she is in a defacto relationship and has children. To reflect her personal circumstances I will deduct a further 6 months from her term leaves a balance of 3 years. There are no other deductions for which she is qualified so 3 years is her final sentence. That is her sentence in respect of both charges, possession of the branches of marijuana, loose leaves of marijuana and the marijuana seeds.
10. Counsel has submitted that term should be ordered to be concurrent to the term she is presently serving. I cannot accede to that request. Because the present offence involves different narcotics, involves offending on a different date and it involves offending while she was awaiting sentence on the first matter. In those circumstances the sentence must be cumulative to the present term of imprisonment she is serving. For this offending therefore Valerie will be convicted and sentenced to 3 years in prison cumulative to her present term of imprisonment.
11. Petelo is in a different category. He was caught in possession of a much smaller quantity of marijuana namely enough to make only 6 joints. There is no evidence Petelo was involved in what appears to be the family business of narcotics. The police summary of facts also says that he was at the time of the offending staying at Savalalo which suggests he does not normally reside there. But it is clear he was there when the police raid occurred. I also note Petelo does not have a background in drug offending and there is no evidence therefore to tie him to the large cache of narcotics netted by the police raid.
12. It is fortunate for you Petelo that is the view the court takes of this matter. You obviously come from a family that seems to be involved in the narcotics trade. I am told your mother is in prison for it, now your sister is serving time for it. I am told charges are pending against your father and there is an outstanding warrant in respect of your brother.
13. It is up to you Petelo what you do with your life. But you have seen what has happened to other people in your family who have become involved in marijuana. If you are a smart guy you should stay away from it. I am not going to send you to prison for this matter Petelo I am giving you a chance today for the reasons that I have stated. You should take that chance because I assure you in marijuana offending there are no second chances.
14. In respect of the offence of possession of 4.1 grams enough to yield 6 marijuana joints you will be convicted and placed on supervision of the probation office for a period of 12 months. During that period you will undertake 100 hours community services as directed by the probation office under the community service program at the times and as directed by the probation office. There will also Petelo be other terms and conditions of your supervision but I am going to order that the office prepare a probation report on you and file a recommendation to the court as to the conditions that you are to also undertake or also abide by. Your case will be adjourned to the 19^th of May for that probation report to be prepared and submitted. But because your supervision commences immediately Petelo you are to report to the probation office twice a week.
15. E tatau ona e lipoti Petelo i le ofisa faanofo vaavaaia amata atu i le vaiaso nei i Aso Lulu ma Aso Faraile o vaiaso uma a’o tapena mai le ripoti lea mo lau susuga. O le aso 19 Me lea ua tolopō iai le mataupu lenei se’i fa’ata’atia mai se ripoti mai le ofisa faanofo vaavaaia mo lau mataupu. Talanoa i le alii ofisa lea e alala mai ae e te le’i alu ese ma le potu faamasinoga i isi tuutuuga o le faaiuga o lau mataupu. Ua e malamalama i le faaiuga o lau mataupu? (Defendant said yes).
    

JUSTICE NELSON