Police v Tauiliili [2020] WSSC 20 (16 March 2020)

	Home \| Databases \| WorldLII \| Search \| Feedback Supreme Court of Samoa

Case name:	Police v Tauiliili 20

Citation:	[2020] WSSC 20

Sentence date:	16 March 2020

Parties:	POLICE v SOONALOTE OFU LAULAUGA (a.k.a) POPE TAUILIILI male of Gautavai Savaii and Vaivase uta.



File number(s):	S116/20

Jurisdiction:	CRIMINAL

Place of delivery:	Supreme Court Samoa Mulinuu

Judge(s):	Justice Fepulea’i Ameperosa Roma

On appeal from:

Order:	- Convicted and sentenced to 12 months supervision.

Representation:	Mr Q. Sauaga for Prosecution Defendant in person

Catchwords:

Words and phrases:	Possession of Narcotics

Legislation cited:	Narcotics Act 1967 s.7 & 18

Cases cited:

Summary of decision:

POLICE v SOONALOTE OFU LAULAUGA (a.k.a) POPE TAUILIILI male of Gautavai Savaii and Vaivase uta.
Defendant

[1] You appear for sentencing on one charge of possession of narcotics contrary to ss7 & 18, Narcotics Act 1967, having pleaded to the charge at the earliest opportunity. The maximum penalty is an imprisonment term of 14 years.

[2] The prosecution Summary which you accept says that on 31 January 2020 when police were patrolling the Apia township from the government house to Malaefatu park at Sogi, they noticed you sitting on the footpath. They found you holding some branches in your left hand, which when asked, you confirmed to be branches of marijuana you had bought from the market.

[3] The 2 small marijuana branches with leaves on them were 36 to 43 centimeters long and weighed 2 grams in total. They were estimated to yield 2 to 5 marijuana cigarettes. You were then cautioned by police and subsequently charged.

[4] From the Summary, you are 26 years of age, unemployed and with no dependents. You have told the Court that you are the third of your parents’ five children. You ended your formal education at Maluafou College. Your lived with your parents in Savaii, but came to Apia to stay with an aunt and seek employment to support your parents. Instead you have offended and ended up in Court.

[5] You are a first offender. You have also continued to remain in custody for just over 6 weeks now since being charged, because you were unable to handover to the Registry your passport as was a condition of your bail.

[6] There are no aggravating features relating to your offending or personal to you as offender.

[7] In relation to the offending, I find that the quantity of cannabis found in your possession was small compared to many other cases that have come before the Court.

[8] As offender, I take into account in mitigation of penalty (i) the fact that you cooperated with police and readily admitted your involvement when caught and questioned by them; (ii) your early plea of guilty; (iii) your personal circumstances including your age and the fact that you are a first offender and (iv) that you have been in custody for over 6 weeks now.

[9] There is a prevalence of narcotic related offending and the Court has generally imposed deterrent sentences.

[10] In your case, prosecution seeks a non custodial sentence of supervision. I have reviewed the authorities cited in their sentencing memorandum; the circumstances of the respective offending; the quantities of substances and the sentences imposed in each case. I accept that a term of supervision is an appropriate sentence in your case.

[11] But I must warn you that I will not be as lenient the next time you come back for the same offending.

[12] On the one charge of possession of narcotics, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months supervision.

[13] I was minded to impose a condition that you complete 60 hours community work. Given the period that you have spent in custody, I will not impose that or any other conditions. But you must comply with any programme or works that Probation may direct during your term of supervision.

Supreme Court of Samoa

Police v Tauiliili [2020] WSSC 20 (16 March 2020)