Police v Siaosi [2024] WSSC 86 (2 August 2024)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Siaosi [2024] WSSC 86 (02 August 2024)

Case name:	Police v Siaosi
Citation:	[2024] WSSC 86
Decision date:	02 August 2024
Parties:	POLICE (Informant) v SULA SIAOSI aka JOE SIAOSI, male of Faleasiu-uta, Malie & Vaiusu (Defendant)
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	Supreme Court – CRIMINAL
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Senior Justice Nelson
On appeal from:
Order:	On the charge of burglary, you will be convicted and sentenced to 4 years in prison. On the charge of theft, I note all the properties were recovered you will be convicted and sentenced to 6 months in prison, concurrent term. Any remand in custody time to be deducted from these terms.
Representation:	T. Fesili for Prosecution Defendant unrepresented
Catchwords:	Burglary – theft – recidivist offender – custodial sentence.
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:	Police v Ajawas [2013] WSSC 49.
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Informant

A N D:

SULA SIAOSI aka JOE SIAOSI, male of Faleasiu-uta, Malie and Vaiusu.

Defendant

Counsel: T. Fesili for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 02 August 2024

SENTENCE

1. The defendant is a veteran offender, he has a number of admitted previous convictions for burglary and theft. The present offending is another example of his burglary and theft activities.
2. The complainant’s house was locked and surrounded by a chain link fence in suburban Apia but this did not deter the defendant. He chose mid-afternoon when he knew no-one was at home. Broke in through the back door, stole a laptop, a cell-phone, a gold watch all valued at $1,600.00 plus $100 cash. But the defendant did not know that this house has cameras and they caught him conducting his various activities. Cameras do not deter everyone but they certainly facilitate apprehending them.
3. The court is well aware of the prevalence of burglary and theft in our community especially in urban Apia and surrounding areas. The courts regularly voice their concern over such matters as well noted by our former Chief Justice in Police v Ajawas [2013] WSSC 49 where he said:
   • “It is, and always has been, regarded as a very serious offence. It may involve considerable loss to the victim. But even when it does not, the victim may lose possessions of a particular value to him or her... That however is only one part. That an intruder should break in or enter, for his own dishonest purposes, leaves the victim with a sense of violation and insecurity. Even where the victim is unaware, at the time, that the burglar is in the house, it can be a frightening experience to learn that a burglary has taken place.”
4. The courts sentence must not only reflect these factors but also hold the defendant accountable for his actions. In cases of re-offenders the primary consideration then becomes deterrence of the defendant and of burglars generally. As well as protection of the community from people like you Sula.
5. Burglary has a maximum penalty by law of ten (10) years in prison. An appropriate start point for this matter would be 3 years, upgraded to 4 years for your bad record. And further upgraded by a period of 2 years to reflect the necessity to protect the community from people such as yourself. That is a start point of 6 years in prison.
6. The only deduction you qualify for is for your guilty plea which has saved everybody time and the courts precious and valuable resources. For those matters I will deduct 2 years, leaving 4 years in prison.
7. On the charge of burglary, you will be convicted and sentenced to 4 years in prison.
8. On the charge of theft, I note all the properties were recovered you will be convicted and sentenced to 6 months in prison, concurrent term. Any remand in custody time to be deducted from these terms.
   

SENIOR JUSTICE NELSON