Police v Iuliano [2014] WSSC 207 (10 December 2014)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Iuliano [2014] WSSC 207

Case name:	Police v Iuliano
Citation:	[2014] WSSC 207
Decision date:	10 December 2014
Parties:	POLICE (Prosecution) AFA IULIANO male of Vaivase-tai. (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:	In the respect of the offence of burglary Afa convicted and sentenced to 2 years in prison. In respect of the offence of theft convicted and sentenced to 12 months in prison concurrent term. Remand in custody time to be deducted.
Representation:	O Tagaloa 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:

AFA IULIANO male of Vaivase-tai.
Defendant

Counsel: O Tagaloa for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 10 December 2014

SENTENCE

1. The defendant appears for sentence on one charge of burglary and one charge of theft. The summary of facts which he admitted this morning says he is a 30 year old male of Magiagi does not appear to have any particular occupation. But was at the time of this offending living with his defacto partner at Lefaga. The complainant is an elderly female of Vaivase-tai.
2. In the early morning hours of Saturday, 30 August while the complainant was asleep at her house the defendant entered the property. He did this by removing the air conditioner to one of the back rooms of the house then crawling through the empty hole. He went into the complainants room and took her bag which contained a number of personal female items as well as jewellery. The early morning sounds of a nearby church woke up the complainant who saw the defendant walking towards the back of the house. She called out “sole” causing the defendant to run away.
3. On the same day at about 10:00 am the defendant returned to Lefaga and handed over the stolen bag and the items to his defacto spouse saying it was a gift from his mother. The police investigation eventually led to the defendant. And the defendants “gift” was returned to its true owner. I am advised by the police prosecutor that all the items taken by the defendant which total some four thousand odd US dollars (US$4,000) worth have been returned to the complainant.
4. The defendant has a long history of previous convictions for burglary and theft. He has been in and out of jail for the past ten years for burglary and theft. He is a veteran thief. He should know that there is no other penalty available and every time he does this he will be sent back to jail. Such a penalty is necessary for the protection of the public and in the hope however slim that the defendant will one day learn that this crime does not pay.
5. Burglary under the new Crimes Act now carries a 10 year maximum penalty. That should tell you how serious the crime is defendant. Considering the circumstances of this case sentence starts at 4 years taking into account your bad record. For your guilty plea I deduct one-quarter of the term namely one year, leaves a balance of 3 years. To reflect the fact that all the goods have been returned to the complainant so she has suffered no loss I deduct a further one year from your term leaves a balance of 2 years.
6. In the respect of the offence of burglary Afa convicted and sentenced to 2 years in prison.
7. In respect of the offence of theft convicted and sentenced to 12 months in prison concurrent term. Remand in custody time to be deducted.
   

JUSTICE NELSON