Police v Leasuasu [2018] WSSC 10 (12 February 2018)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Leasuasu [2018] WSSC 10

Case name:	Police v Leasuasu
Citation:	[2018] WSSC 10
Decision date:	12 February 2018
Parties:	POLICE v LUA LEASUASU male of Lotoso’a, Saleimoa.
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	CHIEF JUSTICE SAPOLU
On appeal from:
Order:	- Convicted of each of the two charges against him and sentenced to 3 years and 7 months imprisonment on each charge. Both sentences to be concurrent. - Any time the accused has already spent in custody pending the outcome of this matter is to be further deducted.
Representation:	F Ioane for prosecution Accused in person
Catchwords:	aggravating features relating to the accused as offender –aggravating features relating to the offending – burglar – recidivist burglar – starting point for sentence – theft
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013, s.174 (1) (a), s.161 (1) (a), s.165 (b)
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

LUA LEASUASU male of Lotoso’a, Saleimoa.
Prosecution

Counsel:
F Ioane for prosecution
Accused in person

Sentence: 12 February 2018

S E N T E N C E

The charges

1. The accused appears for sentence on one charge of burglary, contrary to s.174 (1) (a) of the Crimes Act 2013, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment, and one charge of theft, contrary to s.161 (1) (a) of the Act, which carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment pursuant to s.165 (b). This matter was first mentioned on Monday morning 16 October 2017 and then adjourned several times for the accused to engage counsel and then later applied for legal aid which was declined. He then again wanted to engage counsel but to be paid for by himself. This matter was then further adjourned to Monday 22 January 2018 for the accused to engage counsel paid for by himself. On that day, the accused decided to plead guilty.

The offending

2. According to the prosecution summary of facts, on 29 September 2017 at around 2:00am, the accused went to the complainant’s house, tore off the screen wire of a window, and went inside. He stole several items of property and cash of $500. The total value of the stolen properties and the cash is $10,820.
3. According to the pre-sentence report, the accused told the probation service that he had gone to the hospital on Friday for medical treatment when he met a friend who invited him to his house at Vaoala. At his friend’s house, the accused and his friend drank a bottle of Jim Beam around 8:00pm to 11:00pm. His friend then told him for them to go and get a bottle of alcohol from a neighbour’s house across the road. When they came to the neighbour’s house, they removed the screen wire of a window and the accused entered the house. He made a thorough search of the house but could not find any bottle of alcohol. He then proceeded to the bedroom where the complainant and his wife were sleeping and stole the items of property and the money with which he is now being charged.
4. All the stolen properties were recovered by the police except the money.

The victim

5. According to the prosecution summary of facts, the victim is currently a counselor at the embassy of Japan in Samoa.

The accused

6. The accused is a 42 year old male. He is single and unemployed. He has a very bad criminal record. He has been in and out of prison since 1990 and has numerous previous convictions for burglary and theft. I accept what the prosecution says that he is a recidivist burglar.
7. As pointed out in the pre-sentence report, the accused was eligible for parole in 2014 and 2015 but his applications for parole were declined by the parole board because he continued to reoffend.
8. The accused pleaded guilty to the charges though belatedly.

The aggravating features relating to the offending

9. The following are the aggravating features relating to this offending: (a) the total value of the items of property and the money stolen and (b) this offending involved home invasion at a very late hour at night including the invasion of the bedroom where the complainant and his wife were sleeping.

The aggravating features relating to the accused as offender

10. The accused’s very bad criminal record including numerous previous convictions for burglary and theft is an aggravating feature relating to the accused as offender. He is clearly a threat to the community which needs to be protected.

The mitigating features relating to the accused as offender

11. The accused’s guilty plea, though belated, entitles him to some credit.

Discussion

12. Having regard to the aggravating features of this offending, I will take 3½ years as the starting point for sentence. I will add on 1 year for the aggravating features relating to the accused as offender, namely, his previous convictions especially for similar offending. That increases the starting point to 4½ years. I will deduct 1/5 or 11 months for the guilty plea. That leaves 3 years and 7 months.

Result

13. The accused is convicted of each of the two charges against him and sentenced to 3 years and 7 months imprisonment on each charge. Both sentences to be concurrent.
14. Any time the accused has already spent in custody pending the outcome of this matter is to be further deducted.

CHIEF JUSTICE