Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Court of Appeal of Fiji

Bulumakau v State [2014] FJCA 132; AAU0028.2013 (1 August 2014)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT SUVA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. AAU 0028 OF 2013
(High Court Criminal Action No. HAC 12 of 2012)

BETWEEN:

TEVITA RAIWALUI BULUMAKAU
Appellant

AND:

THE STATE
Respondent

Coram: Chandra RJA
Counsel: Mr. S. Waqainabete for the Appellant
Mr. M. Korovou for the Respondent

Date of Hearing: 3 June 2014
Date of Ruling: 1 August 2014

RULING

1. This is an application for leave to appeal against sentence imposed by the Labasa High Court.
   
2. The Appellant pleaded guilty to the charge of Aggravated Robbery contrary to Section 311(1)(a) of the Crimes Decree and was convicted and sentenced to 8½ years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 7 years.
   
3. The Appellant in his amended application for leave to appeal against sentence set out the following grounds of appeal:
   

l. That the sentence was harsh and excessive as the items were recovered as a result of the cooperation of the Appellant with the Police.

2. That he had not been given an appropriate discount for his early guilty plea.

4. The offence of Aggravated Robbery had been committed by a group of armed men who had forced their way into the victim's house. The Appellant had been one among them and they had threatened the inmates of the house and committed the robbery.

5. The learned High Court Judge had adopted the guidelines in State v. Basa Criminal Appeal No.AAU0024 of 2005, Wainiqolo v. The State AAU0027 of 2006 and State v. Rokonobete & Ors HAC118 of 2007. State v. Manoa [2010] FJHC 409; HAC061.2010(6 August 2010) in sentencing the Appellant.

6. The learned High Court Judge in adopting the principles set out in the cases referred to started with 10 years imprisonment and increased it to 3 years for the aggravating factors and reduced three years for the early guilty plea and a further 1 ½ years for the period he was in custody.

7. The grounds of appeal set out in the application for leave to appeal do not reflect any arguable matters and therefore leave to appeal is refused.

Order of Court:
The Application for leave to appeal is refused.

Hon. Justice S. Chandra
Resident Justice of Appeal