IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Levaopolo [2014] WSSC 131

Case name: 	Police v Levaopolo	
		
Citation: 	[2014] WSSC 131	
		
Decision date: 	28 April  2014	
		
Parties: 	Police (Prosecution)
Eteuati Levaopolo, male of Malololelei, Falelauniu and Foaluga Savaii. (Defendant)	
		
Hearing date(s): 	-	
		
File number(s): 		
		
Jurisdiction: 	Criminal	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Justice Nelson	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	Taking into account all factors that are relevant to your matter Eteuati you will be convicted and ordered to pay the following sums: firstly a fine of $1,000, secondly police costs, probation office costs and court costs of $100 each that is a total sum of $1,300.  This sum is to be paid within 30 days in default of payment you will serve 6 months imprisonment.  	
		
Representation: 	O Tagaloa for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented	
		
Catchwords: 	-	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:		
		
Cases cited:		
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:
		
POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

	ETEUATI LEVAOPOLO, male of Malololelei, Falelauniu and Foaluga Savaii.
Defendant

Counsel:	O Tagaloa for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Sentence:	28 April 2014

SENTENCE
1.	This defendant appears for sentence on a charge of possession of two marijuana cigarettes.  A charge he pleaded guilty to.  The defendant was found smoking the marijuana with a friend on the main road at Malololelei.  According to the summary of facts he is a 33 year old male of Malololelei and Falelauniu and was at the time employed as a Police Officer stationed at the Police Outpost at Faleata.  
2.	His pre-sentence report indicates he is married and has children.  Even though he was a police officer the police patrol that found him and his friends smoking marijuana arrested him.  He was taken back to the central police station where he was searched and the two cigarettes were found on him.  He was immediately charged and according to the summary of facts which the defendant admitted this morning he was later that day not surprisingly dismissed by the Commissioner of Police from the Police Force.  
3.	The defendant admitted to the probation office that he has been smoking marijuana for many years.  It would appear he may be addicted to the drug.  He would have been a good customer for the new Drug and Alcohol Court being set up.  But the Drug and Alcohol Court is not yet up and running so he must be sentenced today in this court for this crime.  
4.	The relevant factors for the purposes of the defendants sentencing is firstly the amount involved is relatively small only two cigarettes.  And it was clearly for personal use only. There is no evidence the defendant was dealing in marijuana or using his position as a police officer to assist those involved in narcotics.  If there was such evidence there is no question what penalty the defendant should receive.  What is before the court indicates he was involved in recreational smoking of marijuana by him and his friend when he was found by the police.  
5.	The defendant according to his pre-sentence report from the probation office has a good background of service to his family and to his Ekalesia etc.  His sister spoke well of him to the probation office and his faifeau has put in a good reference.  He has a clean police record.  He has pleaded guilty in this matter and saved the courts time and resources.  
6.	Considering all the relevant factors in your matter I have come to the conclusion that an imprisonment term is not called for.  But the penalty should reflect societys condemnation of drug use generally.  And by you specifically as a then police officer whose sworn duty was to uphold the law and that includes the law against narcotics.  It was not up to you sir to decide which law you will uphold and which laws you will not follow.  I am sure you were well aware of what you were doing.  The penalty to be imposed on you must reflect the fact that your offending was committed while you held the position of a police officer.  Which as you well know Eteuati in our country and culture is a position of great trust and respect.  You apologised this morning to the court and to your country for what you have done.  That was an appropriate apology because you have shamed both in your actions.  Your dismissal from the Force was an appropriate punishment.  
7.	Taking into account all factors that are relevant to your matter Eteuati you will be convicted and ordered to pay the following sums: firstly a fine of $1,000, secondly police costs, probation office costs and court costs of $100 each that is a total sum of $1,300.  This sum is to be paid within 30 days in default of payment you will serve 6 months imprisonment.  E iai se mea e le’o manino i le fa’aiuga Eteuati? (Defendant said no).  Ia faafetai ua maea.  

JUSTICE NELSON