Police v Tulua [2016] WSSC 123 (29 June 2016)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Tulua [2016] WSSC 123

Case name:	Police v Tulua
Citation:	[2016] WSSC 123
Decision date:	29 June 2016
Parties:	POLICE and MEFIPOSETA TULUA, male of Lotopa (Accused)
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	CRIMINAL
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Tafaoimalo Leilani Tuala-Warren
On appeal from:
Order:	For the charge of possession of narcotics, the accused is convicted and sentenced to 8 months supervision with special conditions. 1) Attend the psycho-education drug and alcohol programme (Toe Afua se Taeao Fou) with Probation for 6 weeks. 2) Use his cooking skills as a chef to help the less fortunate in society. He is to spend 80 hours cooking for the children in the Samoa Victim Support Group Shelter. He will use their ingredients and also transfer his cooking skills to the young mothers in the shelter. For the charge of possession of utensils the accused is convicted and sentenced to 8 months supervision. Both sentences of supervision to be served concurrently.
Representation:	O. Tagaloa for Prosecution A. Sua for the Accused
Catchwords:	Narcotics – possession – utensils – early guilty plea – marijuana – occasional user – first offender - non-custodial sentence
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Narcotics Act 1967 ss.7; 18; 13(b) Community Justice Act 2008 s. 13
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN

P O L I C E
Prosecution

A N D

MEFIPOSETA TULUA male of Lotopa
Accused

Counsel:
O. Tagaloa for Prosecution
A. Sua for the Accused

Sentence: 29 June 2016

S E N T E N C E

The charge

1. The accused appears for sentence on two charges pursuant to the Narcotics Act 1967; one charge of knowingly being in poson of narcotics , contro s.7 of thof the Narcotics 967, which carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment pursuant to s18 and one cone charge of possession of utensils for the purpose of committing an offence under s13(b) which carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment.
2. He pleaded guilty to the charges at the earliest opportunity on 7 December 2015.

The offending

3. According to the Prosecution summary of facts accepted by the accused, on
15 November 2015, the Police were following the car of the accused from Vaoala into town. The Police smelt a strong scent of marijuana coming from the car of the accused. The Police tooted their horn at the accused to stop his car but he continued to drive and it was not until the accused reached Scoops at Matautu that he stopped. Police took the car of the accused into the Police Station and searched it.
4. The Police found;

1. one marijuana branch (without leaves);
2. half a marijuana cigarette; and

100. two straws for the purpose of committing an offence.

The accused

5. The accused is 30 years old. He is self-employed and married with one child. He runs a small catering business which earns his family between $6000-$8000 a month. His wife remains supportive of him.
6. He admitted to Probation that he was a regular user of marijuana but is now an occasional user, when he is out with friends.
7. There is a testimonial from the Bishop of the accused saying that the accused is an active and devoted member of the congregation. There is also a letter from the Pulenuu of Toamua telling the Court that the father of the accused has passed away and it is only his mother left.
8. The accused is a first offender.

Aggravating features of the offending

9. These are drug offences and the usual sentence is imprisonment unless there are exceptional circumstances. Not only was marijuana found, but utensils being two straws were found.
10. He also disregarded the Police which I find aggravating. It does show arrogance and lack of respect for the law on his part.

Mitigating factors

11. I do accept in mitigation that the quantity of marijuana found is small and for personal use.
12. He has been of good character until this offending. The testimonial from his Bishop supports this.
13. He is the only breadwinner of the family as his family depends on his small catering business.
14. His early guilty plea is a mitigating factor.

Discussion

15. The maximum penalties for these offences are very high. However having considered the circumstances of this case, I have decided that it is appropriate to impose a non-custodial sentence.
16. Section 13 of the Community Justice Act 2008 states that a Court may impose a sentence of supervision only if the Court is satisfied that a sentence of supervision would reduce the likelihood of further offending by the offender through the rehabilitation and reintegration of the offender. Section 16 of the same Act states that the Court may impose such special condition or conditions related to the rehabilitation or reintegration of an offender as the Court thinks necessary.
17. His sentence today will reflect an effort at rehabilitation which I suggest the accused take seriously. A stern warning is given that if he commits similar offences in the future, he will most likely end up in prison.

Sentence

18. For the charge of possession of narcotics, the accused is convicted and sentenced to 8 months supervision with special conditions. The first condition is that he attend the psycho-education drug and alcohol programme (Toe Afua se Taeao Fou) with Probation for 6 weeks. The second condition is that he uses his cooking skills as a chef to help the less fortunate in society. He is to spend 80 hours cooking for the children in the Samoa Victim Support Group Shelter. He will use their ingredients and also transfer his cooking skills to the young mothers in the shelter.
19. For the charge of possession of utensils the accused is convicted and sentenced to 8 months supervision.
20. Both sentences of supervision to be served concurrently.
    

JUSTICE TUALA-WARREN