Police v Bryce [2018] WSSC 3 (23 January 2018)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Bryce [2018] WSSC 3

Case name:	Police v Bryce
Citation:	[2018] WSSC 3
Decision date:	23 January 2018
Parties:	POLICE v KERESOME BRYCE male of Leufisa and Siumu.
Hearing date(s):	22 January 2018
File number(s):	S1324/17
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	CHIEF JUSTICE SAPOLU
On appeal from:
Order:	- Convicted of both charges against him and sentenced to 12 months supervision on the special condition that he is to perform 70 hours community service as directed by the probation service.
Representation:	O Tagaloa for prosecution Accused in person
Catchwords:	aggravating features relating to the offending – Alcohol and Drugs Court – burglary – theft – mitigating features relating to the accused as offender – Toe Afua Se Taeao Fou programme
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013, S.174
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

KERESOME BRYCE male of Leufisa and Siumu.
Accused

Counsel:
O Tagaloa for prosecution
Accused in person

Sentence: 23 January 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 of the Crimes Act 2013, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment, and one charge of theft which carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment. To both charges, the accused pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.

The offending

2. As shown from the prosecution summary of facts accepted by the accused, on 3 September 2017 at around 4:00am, the accused went into the complainant’s house at Vailima and stole a flat screen TV set with an estimated value of NZ$2,000. As he was about to leave the house with the TV set, he was caught by the complainant. The accused then abandoned the TV set.

The accused

3. The accused is a 34 year old male with a wife and three children. He is employed as a security in one of the nightclubs in Apia. He told the probation service that he was drunk at the time of this offending as he had been drinking alcohol with his friends. He then committed this offending out of anger and frustration with is landlord who had told his family to leave the land where they were living. The complainant is a neighbour of the accused.
4. The accused has attended and successfully completed the seven week Toe Afua Se Taeao Fou programme of the Alcohol and Drugs Court (ADC) to address his alcohol issues. He has graduated with a certificate of due completion.
5. Supporting character testimonials were provided for the accused by his wife, his former pastor, and employer. The accused has also expressed remorse to the probation service and to the Court. He also pleaded guilty to the charges against him at the earliest opportunity. He is also a first offender.

The aggravating features relating to the offending

6. The aggravating features relating to this offending are: (a) it involved home invasion, (b) the time of the offending, and (c) the value of the stolen property though it was recovered because the accused was caught by the complainant as the accused was leaving the house with the TV.

The mitigating features relating to the accused as offender

7. The mitigating features relating to the accused as offender are: (a) his expressions of remorse to the Court and the probation service, (b) supporting character testimonials, (c) he has also attended and successfully completed the seven week Toe Afua Se Taeao Fou programme of the ADC, and (d) his early guilty plea.

Discussion

8. Having regard to the aggravating features relating to the offending and the mitigating features relating to the accused as offender as well as the personal circumstances of the accused set out in the pre-sentence report, I have decided to give the accused a second chance to redeem himself. But I must warn the accused that if he reoffends and appear in Court again in the future, then there is a real risk of him going to prison.

Result

9. The accused is convicted of both charges against him and sentenced to 12 months supervision on the special condition that he is to perform 70 hours community service as directed by the probation service.

CHIEF JUSTICE