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

Tagivakatini v The State [2004] FJHC 262; HAM0076D.2004S (17 November 2004)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL MISC. CASE NO: HAM0076 OF 2004S

Between:

JOSEFA TAGIVAKATINI
Applicant

And:

THE STATE
Respondent

Hearing: 16th November 2004
Ruling: 17th November 2004

Counsel: Applicant in Person
Ms N. Tikoisuva for State

RULING ON BAIL PENDING APPEAL

The Applicant was convicted of robbery with violence and unlawful use of motor vehicle on the 15th of October 2004. He was sentenced to a total of 5 years and 6 months for these offences. Because I do not have the court record, I am not aware of the details of the charges. However I am told by both the Applicant and State counsel that the Applicant pleaded not guilty in the lower court, and was found guilty after trial.

The Applicant applies for bail on the ground that his appeal is bound to succeed. As I have neither the court record nor the petition of appeal before me, the merits of the appeal are impossible to assess. However, assuming that the appeal is heard early next year there will only be a delay of some 4 months before hearing.

The principles relevant to an application are the likelihood of the success of the appeal, the likely time lapse before the appeal is heard, the proportion of the sentence which will have been served when the appeal is heard, and the existence of any exceptional circumstances.

In this case, the Applicant has not shown that any of these principles apply. He submits that his grounds of appeal are that he was prejudiced by lack of legal representation, and that his sentence is harsh and excessive. As I have said, the merits of these grounds are impossible to ascertain at this stage. However a 5½ year term for robbery with violence is within the tariff, and, all things being equal, does not appear to be obviously wrong in principle.

This bail application is dismissed.

Nazhat Shameem
JUDGE

At Suva
17th November 2004.