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

Silivale v State [2022] FJHC 173; HAA018.2021 (7 April 2022)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI

AT LABASA

[APPELLATE JURISDICTION]

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. HAA 18 OF 2021

BETWEEN : JONE INIA SILIVALE

AND : STATE

Counsel : Appellant in Person

Ms L Latu for the State

Date of Hearing : 04 April 2022

Date of Judgment : 07 April 2022

JUDGMENT

[1] On 25 September 2021, the appellant was brought to Seaqaqa Police Station for questioning. When a woman police constable asked the appellant to identify himself by his name he gave her a false name. When the police conducted a further inquiry regarding the identity of the appellant they found out that the appellant had a pending warrant against him under a different but correct name.

[2] The appellant was charged with giving false information to a public servant. Under caution he admitted the offence to police and pleaded guilty to the charge in the Magistrates’ Court.

[3] On 11 October ober 2021, the appellant was sentenced to 15 months and 17 days imprisonment with a non-parole period of 10 months.

[4] Thia timely appeal against sentence only. The main complaint iint is that the sentence is manifestly excessive in all circumstances of the case.

[5] The learned magistrate used the two-tiered approach to explain the sentence that she imposed on the appellant. She referred to the maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment for the offence and three cases where sentences in the range of 16-25 months were imposed. She picked 2 years as a starting point and then deducted 2 months for guilty plea, 6 months for mitigating factors and 13 days for the remand period. There were no aggravating circumstances.

[6] At the timthe offence, the appellant lant was 37 years old and a first time offender. He admitted the offence to police and pleaded guilty. The learned magistrate did not give reasons why she only gave a discount of 2 months for the appellant’s expression of genuine remorse and for saving court’s time and resources by pleading guilty early. It is clear that the learned magistrate did not give sufficient weight to the appellant’s guilty plea.

[7] In State v Buliqereqere [2019] FJHC 469; HAC178.2018 (22 May 2019) a 21-year university student was sentenced to 9 months 2 weeks imprisonment but suspended after pleading guilty to giving false name to a police officer.

[8] In Dakaibitu v State [2019] FJHC 1192; HAA23.2019 (23 December 2019) the offender was sentenced to 5 months imprisonment on appeal for giving a false name and address to a police officer.

[9] In State v Raitekiteki [2016] FJHC 1105; HAC285.2015 (7 December 2016) the offender was sentenced to 6 months imprisonment after he was tried and convicted of giving a false name to a police officer in due execution of his duties.

[10] In Vula v State [2017] FJHC 9A0; HAA83.2017 (20 December 2017) a sentence of 6 months imprisonment for giving a false name to a police officer was affirmed on appeal.

[11] The present sentence of 15 months andays imprisonment is clearllearly excessive. That sentence is set aside and substituted with a sentence of 6 months imprisonment effective from 11 October 2021. Suspension is inappropriate.

[12] The appeal is allowed.

. ...........................................

Hon. Mr Justice Daniel Goundar

Solicitors:

Appellant in Person

Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for the Respondent