IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Falega [2016] WSSC 135

Case name: 	Police v Falega	
		
Citation: 	[2016] WSSC 135	
		
Decision date: 	26 July 2016	
		
Parties: 	POLICE v AFIOGA FALEGA male of Nuusuatia	
		
Hearing date(s): 	26 July 2016	
		
File number(s): 		
		
Jurisdiction: 	Criminal	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	JUSTICE TUALA-WARREN	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	•	For each charge of burglary, the accused is convicted and sentenced to 12 months supervision. 
•	For the charge of theft, the accused is convicted and sentenced to 6 months supervision. 
•	All sentences of supervision to be served concurrently.
•	A condition of his supervision is that he attends the alcohol and drugs programme known as Toe Afua se Taeao Fou conducted by Probation or a suitable youth development programme with alcohol counselling. A second condition of his supervision is that he is to refrain from consuming alcohol.

Representation: 	F. Ioane for Prosecution
Accused in person	
		
Catchwords: 	Burglary -  theft – reconciliation – aggravating and mitigating features – alcohol consumption – supervision term	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013 section 174	
		
Cases cited:		
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN

P O L I C E
Prosecution

A N D

AFIOGA FALEGA male of Nu’usatia
Accused

Counsel:
F. Ioane for Prosecution
Accused in person

Sentence: 26 July 2016

S E N T E N C E
The charge
1.	The accused appears for sentence on two charges of burglary, contrary to s.174 of the Crimes Act 2013, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment each, and one charge of theft pursuant to ss 161 and 165(d) Crimes Act 2013 which carries a maximum penalty of 1 year imprisonment. 
2.	He pleaded entered not guilty pleas to the charges on 11 March 2016 but on the day of the hearing 1 July 2016, he was granted leave to vacate his not guilty pleas and substitute them with guilty pleas.  
The offending 
3.	The Prosecution summary of facts admitted by the accused says that on 16 August 2015, the accused entered the first complainant’s home while the first complainant and his family were at church. The accused was caught by a fellow villager and chased out of the first complainant’s home.
4.	The accused left and approached the second complainant’s shop. The shop was unattended. The accused entered the shop and stole one carton of pall mall cigarettes valued at SAT$96.00 and cash of SAT$20.00. 
5.	The total value of the stolen property is SAT$116.50.
The accused
6.	The accused is 17 years old. He is single and unemployed. He works on the family plantation. He is the youngest of his parent’s 7 children.
7.	He told Probation that he drank two large bottles of beer before the offending at 10am on a Sunday morning. He said he was remorseful for what he did. His mother told Probation that this offending is out of character for her son. There are testimonials from his village mayor and religious leader attesting to his good character.
8.	There has been reconciliation with the second complainant as the parents of the accused apologised to the second complainant. The first complainant is in America.
9.	He is a first offender.
Aggravating features of the offending
10.	Prosecution submits that an aggravating feature is that the accused invaded the home of the complainants. I agree. A home invasion is such a personal affront to a victim.
11.	It was also premeditated and carried out at a time when the home and shop were unattended.
12.	There are also two victims here which is an aggravating feature.
Mitigating factors
13.	I take into account the young age of the accused, being 17 years.
14.	The apology by the parents of the accused to the second complainant is taken into account.  
15.	A mitigating factor is his guilty pleas to the charges although belated
Discussion
16.	Prosecution recommends a conviction and a sentence of supervision.  
17.	 Having taken into account the aggravating features of the offending, I find that a non-custodial sentence is appropriate in this case. The involvement of alcohol signals to me that this young man is in need of some assistance in relation to his alcohol consumption. He should not be drinking alcohol at his age. I find that a sentence of supervision will allow him to attend a programme to address his alcohol consumption before it leads him to more serious offending. To drink two large bottles of beer early on a Sunday morning signals an issue with alcohol.
18.	I must also mention the Court’s distaste with the fact that instead of attending church, he chose to victimise those who had left their homes to attend church.
19.	The accused is strongly cautioned against future burglaries. These offences carry high penalties and the Court does not look kindly on re-offenders. He is young and if he does not want to spend his life going in and out of prison, then he is to stay away from offending.
Sentence
20.	For each charge of burglary, the accused is convicted and sentenced to 12 months supervision. 
21.	For the charge of theft, the accused is convicted and sentenced to 6 months supervision. 
22.	All sentences of supervision to be served concurrently.
23.	A condition of his supervision is that he attends the alcohol and drugs programme known as Toe Afua se Taeao Fou conducted by Probation or a suitable youth development programme with alcohol counselling. A second condition of his supervision is that he is to refrain from consuming alcohol.

JUSTICE TUALA-WARREN