Police v Sekati [2016] WSSC 62 (7 March 2016)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Sekati [2016] WSSC 62

Case name:	Police v Sekati
Citation:	[2016] WSSC 62
Decision date:	7 March 2016
Parties:	POLICE (prosecution) and Faitasia SEKATI, male of Safua and Lalomalava (defendant)
Hearing date(s):	-
File number(s):	S79/16
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Vaai
On appeal from:
Order:	For this offence you are convicted and placed on Probation for 2 years. You will do 50 hours of community service and you will attend any programme that the probation service will direct you to undertake.
Representation:	F Lagaaia for prosecution
	Unrepresented
Catchwords:	Possession of narcotics
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

FAITASIA SEKATI male of Safua and Lalomalava
Defendant

Counsel:
F Lagaaia for prosecution
Unrepresented
Sentence: 7 March 2016

S E N T E N C E

1. Defendant you have heard the summary of facts which you accepted and that you are liable to 14 years imprisonment for your offence.
2. The rise in the offending involving narcotics has prompted parliament to increase the penalty from 7 years imprisonment to 14 years. You were at the time of your offending employed at the Salelologa Market as a maintenance officer and it was during that time that you were caught in possession of narcotics.
3. The police officer who was suspicious at the time would have had no ground to search you if you had not run away. But you ran away and that gave him reasonable cause to believe that you were in possession of drugs.
4. Twelve and a half cigarette of marijuana were found on you. You told the probation service that the cigarettes of marijuana were given to you by a friend from Salelologa village and it was probably the same friend who went and told the police that you were in possession of drugs.
5. You did tell the probation service that it was that friend name Pauli who went and told the police that you were in possession of drugs. And that is probably correct because the police approached you and he was suspicious that you were in possession of drugs.
   
6. There is no other reason in the summary of facts to indicate that the police had any reasonable grounds to believe that you were in possession of drugs. In any event if your friend gave you drugs, you knowingly accepted those drugs. There was probably very good reason why your friend gave you drugs because you willingly accepted those 12 ½ joints marijuana.
7. You are 27 years of age, you are in a defacto relationship and you have two children to look after. As a result of your offending, your employment with the authorities running the Salelologa market has been terminated.
8. Prosecution is quite correct to submit that deterrent measure must always be considered when passing sentence on those appearing for narcotics offences and a custodial sentence must always be the case unless there are exceptional circumstances. Other than yourself, the other victim of the offending, of course will be your wife and your two children. You should have thought about that before you decided to accept those drugs. In any event, considering your first offender status, the circumstances and your personal circumstance in the probation report I have considered that a custodial sentence is not the appropriate one at this stage.
9. For this offence you are convicted and placed on Probation for 2 years. You will do 50 hours of community service and you will attend any programme that the probation service will direct you to undertake.

JUSTICE VAAI