Police v Toomalatai [2016] WSSC 92 (16 May 2016)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Toomalatai [2016] WSSC 92

Case name:	Police v Toomalatai
Citation:	[2016] WSSC 92
Decision date:	16 May 2016
Parties:	POLICE v JEREMIAH TOOMALATAI male of Vaivase-Uta (Accused)
Hearing date(s):	16 May 2016
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	JUSTICE LEILANI TUALA-WARREN
On appeal from:
Order:	- Convicted and sentenced to 8 months supervision pursuant to s.12 of the Community Justice Act 2008. Special conditions of supervision are; he is to undergo counselling through Probation for alcohol, perform 60 hours of community service and he is not to consume alcohol or go to a night club.
Representation:	F Ioane for prosecution Accused in person
Catchwords:	Theft – aggravating features – mitigating factors
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013 section 161(a) Community Justice Act 2008 section 12
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN

P O L I C E
Prosecution

A N D

JEREMIAH TOOMALATAI male of Vaivase Uta
Accused

Counsel:
F Ioane for Prosecution
A. Sua for Accused

Sentence: 16 May 2016

S E N T E N C E

The charge

1. The accused is an 18 year old male of Vaivase Uta. He appears for sentence on one charge of theft, contrary to s.161 (a) of the Crimes Act 2013, which carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment pursuant to s165(b) Crimes Act 2013. He pleaded guilty through Counsel to the charge at the earliest opportunity.

The offending

2. The Prosecution summary of facts admitted by the accused says that on 12 March 2016, the victim was at RSA nightclub with some of her family members. When she went to dance on the dance floor, the accused approached the victim’s table and took the victim’s phone from her handbag which was on the table. He put the phone into his pocket. One of his friend’s then took the phone from the accused pocket and left the RSA.
3. When the night club closed at 12.00am, the victim discovered her phone missing. When she called her phone, one friends of the accused answered the phone. The victim then went by taxi and retrieved her phone from Magiagi from a person named Willie.
4. The value of the phone is AUD$1025.00

The accused

5. As shown in the pre-sentence report, the accused is 18 years old. He lives with his parents and siblings at Vaivase Uta. He completed Vaimauga College at year 10 and has worked for Lee Transport as a casual worker since February 2016 earning $120.00 per week.
6. This is the first time he has gotten into trouble with the law.
7. The character testimonials from his faifeau lagolago of the Worship Centre and the pulenuu of Tanoa-o-le-ia, tell of a youth who works hard and is not a trouble-maker.

Aggravating features

8. Prosecution submits that an aggravating feature is that the accused planned to steal the phone as he took it when the victim was on the dance floor. I agree that he planned his actions.
9. Another aggravating feature is that the value of the phone is significant, being AUD$1025.00.

Mitigating Factors

10. I consider the young age of the accused as a mitigating factor.
11. I consider that he is being productive by being in paid employment which helps his family.
12. I take into account the character testimonials from the faifeau lagolago and his pulenuu as being in his favour.
13. I also take into account his early guilty plea.

Discussion

14. Prosecution submits that the offending by the accused attracts a non-custodial sentence.
15. Probation in its pre sentence report suggests that the accused would likely respond satisfactorily to a sentence of supervision and Probation recommends a community based sentence of supervision with a special condition to attend a rehabilitation programme.
16. Before imposing sentence, of concern to the Court is the fact that the accused, being 18 years old, was inside a night club for which the legal age of entry under the law, is 21 years. This is something of which his parents should be mindful. He is also at an impressionable age when he needs guidance and education around alcohol. His sentence today will focus on some alcohol education or counselling for him.

Sentence

17. Having considered the circumstances of this case I have decided to impose a non-custodial sentence. The accused is convicted and sentenced to 8 months supervision pursuant to s.12 of the Community Justice Act 2008. Special conditions of supervision are; he is to undergo counselling through Probation for alcohol, perform 60 hours of community service and he is not to consume alcohol or go to a night club.
    

JUSTICE TUALA-WARREN