IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Iese [2016] WSSC 136

Case name: 	Police v Iese	
		
Citation: 	[2016] WSSC 136	
		
Decision date: 	26 July 2016	
		
Parties: 	POLICE v TOKATUKI MALUA IESE male of Salani and Vaipuna	
		
Hearing date(s): 	26 July 2016	
		
File number(s): 		
		
Jurisdiction: 	Criminal	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	JUSTICE TUALA-WARREN	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	•	For both charges, the accused is convicted and ordered to come up for sentence in 12 months time, on the condition that he is not to reoffend	
		
Representation: 	F. Ioane for Prosecution
Accused in person	
		
Catchwords: 	Burglary – aggravating and mitigating features of the offence – rehabilitation 	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013 section 174, section 161-165 (d)	
		
Cases cited:		
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN

P O L I C E
Prosecution

A N D

TOKATUKI MALUA IESE male of Salani and Vaipuna
Accused

Counsel:
F. Ioane for Prosecution
Accused in person

Sentence: 26 July 2016

S E N T E N C E
The charge
1.	The accused appears for sentence on one charge of burglary, contrary to s.174 of the Crimes Act 2013, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment, and one charge of theft pursuant to ss 161 and 165(d) Crimes Act 2013 which carries a maximum penalty of 1 year imprisonment. 
2.	He pleaded guilty to the charges on 23 May 2016.  
The offending 
3.	The Prosecution summary of facts admitted by the accused says that on 16 March 2016, at Matatufu, the accused went inside Samoa Hideaway Bar and stole one bottle of Jack Daniel whiskey valued at SAT$287.00.
The accused
4.	The accused is 33 years old, married with two children. He was referred by the Court to the 6 weeks Alcohol and Drugs Programme on 23 May 2016. He completed that programme and was given a certificate of completion on 6 July 2016.
5.	He is a first offender.
Aggravating features of the offending
6.	Prosecution submits that an aggravating feature is that the accused invaded the bar belonging to the victim. I agree. 
Mitigating factors
7.	It is of significant mitigation that the accused has attended and completed the Alcohol and Drugs programme. He offended whilst in the pursuit of alcohol. This programme has addressed the cause of his offending behaviour.
8.	A mitigating factor is also his early guilty pleas to the charges.
Discussion
9.	Prosecution recommends a conviction and a sentence of community work.  
10.	Having taken into account the aggravating features of the offending, I find that a non-custodial sentence is appropriate in this case. 
11.	I am convinced that the accused should be given an opportunity to utilise what he has learnt in the programme to now be a law abiding member of the community.  This is his one chance at rehabilitation which the Court will allow.
12.	The accused is advised to think carefully before he commits another offence in the pursuit of alcohol. He must think of his children first.
Sentence
13.	For both charges, the accused is convicted and ordered to come up for sentence in 12 months time, on the condition that he is not to reoffend.
JUSTICE TUALA-WARREN