Police v Vaiola [2023] WSSC 54 (22 August 2023)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Vaiola [2023] WSSC 54 (22 August 2023)

Case name:	Police v Vaiola
Citation:	WSSC 54
Decision date:	22 August 2023
Parties:	POLICE (Informant) v SOLOMONA VAIOLA AMOSA a.k.a PATI VAIOLA male of Matautu uta, Saleufi, Faleasiu and Iva Savaii. (Defendant)
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):	02017 per Charging Document dated 31/7/23.
Jurisdiction:	CRIMINAL
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Fepulea’i A. Roma
On appeal from:	On the one charge of robbery, you are convicted and sentenced to 16 months’ supervision with a condition that you complete the 9 weeks’ programme by Salvation Army.
Order:
Representation:	I. Atoa for the Prosecution Defendant appears in Person
Catchwords:	Robbery.
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013, ss. 176 & 33.
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN

P O L I C E

Informant

A N D

SOLOMONA VAIOLA AMOSA a.k.a PATI VAIOLA male of Matautu uta, Saleufi, Faleasiu and Iva Savaii

Defendant

Counsel: I. Atoa for the Prosecution

Defendant in person

Sentence: 22 August 2023

SENTENCE

Charge

1. You are a jointly charged with a co accused for robbery which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment. You both pleaded guilty to the charge on the 31st July. A warrant was subsequently issued against your co-accused for his non-appearance.

Offending

2. From the police summary which you admitted on the 17th August, the offending occurred at Savalalo at around 3.30pm on the 17th July 2023. The 25 year old male victim of Malifa was walking home from the bus depot. Between the GSI store and SNPF Plaza your co-accused hugged the victim from behind, told him not to move and to remove his watch. The victim struggled to free himself. You then approached and forcefully removed the watch from the victim’s wrist. Your co-accused loosened his grip on the victim’s hand and he was able to go. He immediately sought help from police who could not immediately locate you. Later the same evening, you were apprehended and interviewed by police.
3. You told Probation that you had been out selling stuff that afternoon when you came across the victim. You admit that whilst your co-accused had his hand around the victim’s shoulder, you took his watch from him. The victim was known to you. You called him to come back and get his watch but he ran off and returned with police not long after. You also told Probation that you were intoxicated having consumed alcohol earlier with your co-accused and other street vendors in town while selling your items.

Aggravating Factors

4. I consider the impact on the victim.

Mitigating Factors

5. In relation to the offending, I consider:
   • (i) that apart from removing the victim’s watch, there is no evidence that you inflicted violence or threatened to inflict violence. I find the gravity of your offending therefore to be at the lower end of the scale;
   • (ii) that you had apologised to the victim and returned the watch;
   • (iii) that you entered a guilty plea at the earliest opportunity when police finalised the charge;
   • (iv) your personal circumstances. You are 33 years of age, you have a defacto partner and a four year old son. Prior to the offending you were renting an apartment at Saleufi. The material before me says you had moved to New Zealand under the quota scheme to live and worked a number of jobs. You returned to Samoa following a custody battle over your child with an ex-partner in New Zealand. You have since entered into another relationship. Your partner and you have been together for eight years and have a four year old son. You have worked a number of jobs in the tourism industry to support your family. You now sell items to earn a living. Your background shows that you have had opportunities that most people do not have. But it is clear also that you have had run ins with the law involving drugs and alcohol. You have a previous conviction for possession of marijuana in 2019 for which you were handed a supervision sentence which you completed satisfactorily. Seven years later you are back for an alcohol related matter. In saying that I have listened carefully to your plea for leniency and to be given another chance and I accept your remorse.

Discussion

6. Prosecution seek a custodial sentence with a starting point of seven months to be followed by a term of supervision. I have considered the cases cited in support but as I have said, I find the gravity of your offending to be at the lower end of the scale. The charge of robbery is theft accompany by violence or threats of violence. Apart from your removal of the victim’s watch, the summary does not disclose any other violence inflicted or threats of violence made on your part. Taking that into account, your guilty plea, your apology and remorse, it is appropriate in my view that non-custodial sentence is imposed.

Result

7. On the one charge of robbery, you are convicted and sentenced to 16 months’ supervision with a condition that you complete the 9 weeks’ programme by Salvation Army.

JUSTICE ROMA