Police v Sefo [2021] WSSC 60 (3 December 2021)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Sefo [2021] WSSC 60

Case name:	Police v Sefo
Citation:	[2021] WSSC 60
Decision date:	3 December 2021
Parties:	POLICE v IOANE SEFO male of Nofoalii and Faleatiu
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):	S1378/17
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	CHIEF JUSTICE
On appeal from:
Order:	- sentenced to a period of 12 months supervision cumulative to the current sentence that he is serving, as noted above. In other words, once he is released from prison after serving his current sentence of imprisonment, he should then begin a period of supervision for a period of 12 months. I direct that the defendant be enrolled in a program to address alcohol and drug addictions.
Representation:	F Ioane for prosecution C Vaai for accused
Catchwords:	possession of narcotics – maximum penalty – sentence
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Narcotics Act 1967s.6(b), ss 7&18
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

IOANE SEFO male of Nofoalii and Faleatiu.
Accused

Counsel:
F Ioane for prosecution
C Vaai for accused

Sentence: 3 December 2021

SENTENCE OF PERESE CJ

1. The defendant in this matter is a 24-year-old male of Nofoalii and Faleatiu. At the time of the offending he was 20 years old.
2. On the 5 October 2017, police received a complaint from a member of the public against the defendant for allegedly stealing her phone.
3. Police carried out an investigation and the defendant was brought to the Faleata Police outpost.
4. At the police station, a routine body search was conducted on the defendant.
5. During the said search, police found in the defendant’s brown pants pockets narcotics wrapped in foil.
6. On 20 September 2020, at the trial, defendant through counsel vacated his not guilty pleas and substituted guilty pleas for the following charges:
   • (a) S1658/17 – one charge of narcotics namely loose marijuana leaves pursuant to s.7 & 18 of the Narcotics Act 1967. The maximum penalty is 14 years imprisonment.
   • (b) S1378/17 – one charge of possession of narcotics namely (57) seeds of marijuana pursuant to s.6(b) of the Narcotics Act 1967. The maximum penalty is 14 years imprisonment.
     
7. I have had the opportunity of reviewing the prosecution’s sentencing memorandum dated 19 October 2021 and supplementary memorandum dated 1 December 2021.
8. I am troubled by this sentencing.
9. There is no explanation as to why it has taken so long for the resolution of the defendant’s matter to have reached this point. It appears the offence occurred in October 2017, but his trial was not until September 2021. It is not as if the Police could not reasonably have located the defendant. He had been sentenced for the offences of burglary, theft and intentional damage to a period of imprisonment on the 14 October 2020. Had this defendant been dealt with in a timely way, sometime in late 2017 or in 2018, whatever length of sentence he may have been required to serve would very likely have been completed before September 2021.
10. I accept the submissions made by counsel for the defendant that it is not the defendant’s fault that he was charged and put in prison for charges relating to another Ioane Sefo. Mr Vaai submits these other charges were refuted at the time the defendant was unrepresented, and the defendant continued to plead not guilty until prosecution identified their charging error and rectified the charging document, but that all the while, the defendant was held in custody.
11. Mr Vaai responsibly acknowledges there is a need for rehabilitation for this particular defendant, such rehabilitation not being easily available to the defendant serving a sentence of imprisonment. Mr Vaai submits that if the Court was to sentence the defendant to a period of imprisonment, the appropriate starting point may be 1½ years, as compared to the prosecution’s submission that an appropriate starting point is 2½ years.
12. The Court’s approach to sentencing for narcotics offences, given the prevalence of narcotics in our country, is to sentence the defendant to jail unless there are special circumstances. The court has been consistent in its approach to narcotics cases over many years. There is a need to deter this type of offending. There is no doubt in my mind that the possession of the 57 seeds of marijuana seeds is a serious matter. However, I’m also concerned that there are special circumstances in this case for approaching the sentencing in a different way. In this regard I consider it appropriate that the defendant not be sentenced to a period of imprisonment, given the special circumstances of this case, but that he be sentenced to a period of 12 months supervision cumulative to the current sentence that he is serving, as noted above. In other words, once he is released from prison after serving his current sentence of imprisonment, he should then begin a period of supervision for a period of 12 months. I direct that the defendant be enrolled in a program to address alcohol and drug addictions.

CHIEF JUSTICE