SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Papalii [2015] WSSC 66

Case name: 	Police v Papalii	
		
Citation: 	[2015] WSCC	
		
Decision date: 	2 July 2015	
		
Parties: 	POLICE (prosecution) v METUSELA AUKUSITINO PAPALII male of Vaigaga Salepouae, Saleimoa (accused)	
		
Hearing date(s): 		
		
File number(s): 	S1441/15	
		
Jurisdiction: 	Criminal 	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Chief Justice Sapolu	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	-	Convicted and sentenced to 17 months imprisonment. Time already spent in custody is to be deducted from that sentence.
-		
		
Representation: 	R Titi for prosecution
Accused in person

Catchwords: 	possession of narcotics – maximum penalty – early guilty plea – aggravating features relating to the offending – quantity of marijuana – commercial purpose – mitigating features – sentence  	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:	Narcotics Act 1967s.7	
		
Cases cited:		
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

FILE NO:  S1441/15

BETWEEN

P  O  L  I  C  E
Prosecution

A  N  D

METUSELA AUKUSITINO PAPALII male of Vaigaga Salepouae, Saleimoa.
Accused

Counsel:	
R Titi for prosecution
Accused in person

Sentence:	  2 July 2015
S  E N  T  E  N  C  E
The charge
1. 	The accused appears for sentence on one charge of possession of narcotics, namely, eighteen marijuana joints, contrary to s.7 of the Narcotics Act 1967, which carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment under s.18. To the charge, he pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.
Offending 
2. 	According to the prosecution’s summary of facts admitted by the accused, on early Monday morning 27 April 2015, a police officer who was shopping at the flea market at Savalalo saw the accused at the tap area of the market where there was a wooden rubbish bin. The police officer then noticed the accused reached under the wooden rubbish bin and took out a white plastic cup and removed one marijuana joint from the cup and gave it to a man who was with him. The police officer then walked over and grabbed the accused’s hand. He discovered that the accused was in possession of seventeen other marijuana joints wrapped in a foil. The police officer then took the accused to the Apia police station where he was cautioned, interviewed, and then charged.
The accused 
3. 	The accused is 27 years and married with four children.  They live at his wife’s family. He has a tattooing business from which he sometimes earns about $700 a week.
4. 	The testimonial from the accused’s wife shows the accused as a caring and loving husband as well as being a reliable and trustworthy person. The testimonial from the accused’s father in law shows the accused as an obedient person upon whom their family depends. The testimonial from the lay preacher of the accused’s church shows the accused as a frequent church goer who is supportive of the activities of his church. The testimonial from the pulenuu of the accused’s village shows the accused as a respectful member of the village and is supportive of village activities. For these people to come up in support of the accused is a sign that he is well regarded within his family and village in spite of his present offending.  
Aggravating features relating to the offending
5. 	The following are the aggravating features relating to the offending that I accept: 
(a)	Quantity of marijuana
6. 	The quantity of eighteen marijuana joints found in the accused’s possession is an aggravating feature relating to the offending.
(b)	Commercial purpose
7. 	It is clear from the place and other circumstances in which these marijuana joints were found in the accused’s possession that he was in possession of these  substances for a commercial purpose. From countless cases of possession that have come before the Court, the market at Fugalei and to a lesser extent the flea market at Savalalo are the two places in Apia where marijuana substances are very frequently sold to consumers.
Aggravating features relating to the accused as offender
8. 	The one aggravating feature relating to the accused as offender is that it appears he committed the present offence after he had been charged with his previous offence of possession and before he was sentenced for that offence on 28 May 2015. This is evidently not a sign of remorse on the part of the accused for his present offending.
Mitigating feature relating to the accused as offender
	Early guilty plea
9. 	The accused’s early guilty plea is a mitigating feature relating to him as offender.
Discussion
10. 	Having regard to the aggravating features relating to the offending, I will take 2years as the starting point for sentence. I will add on 3 months for the one aggravating feature relating to the accused as offender. That increases the starting point to 2years and 3 months. I will deduct 1/3 for the early guilty plea. That leaves 18 months. I will deduct a further one month for the accused’s good services to his family, village, and church. That leaves 17 months. The accused is, of course, not of previous perfect character. But it appears from the testimonials filed on his behalf that there is still some goodness in him.
The result
11. 	The accused is convicted and sentenced to 17 months imprisonment. Any time that he has already spent in custody in relation to this matter is to be deducted from that sentence.
CHIEF JUSTICE SAPOLU