Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Supreme Court of Samoa

Police v Pilikati [2019] WSSC 3 (5 February 2019)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Pilikati [2019] WSSC 3

File No.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN

P O L I C E
Prosecution

A N D

APISAI IOSEFA PILIKATI male of Leufisa and Vaiala.
Accused

Counsel:
L Sua Mailo for prosecution
Accused in person

Sentence: 5 February 2019

S E N T E N C E

The charges

1. The accused Apisai Iosefa Pilikati of Leufisa appears for sentence on one charge of burglary, contrary to s.174 of the Crimes Act 2013, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment; one charge of theft, contrary to s.161 of the Act, which carries a maximum penalty of one year imprisonment pursuant to s.165 (c); and one charge of intentional damage, contrary to s.184 (2) (a) of the Act, which carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment. To all charges, he pleaded guilty.

The offending

2. The prosecution summary of facts accepted the accused shows that on 29 October 2018 at around 5:00am, the accused went to the house of the first complainant at Leufisa while the first complainant and her family were asleep. The accused entered the first complainant’s house through the front door and stole one Alcatel cell phone valued at $99, one Blue mobile cellphone valued at $49, and $5.00 cash. The total value of these items of property including the cash is $153. The accused then left the first complainant’s house and sold the cell phones to someone whom he told the probation service is a street vendor for $25.00.
3. Later on the same day at around 5:00pm, the accused who was then intoxicated, approached a taxi driven by the second complainant parked at the Motootua taxi stand and punched the side of the taxi mirror of the taxi and broke the side mirror. The accused told the probation service that the driver of the taxi then contacted the police who came and apprehended him.

The accused

4. The summary of facts shows that the accused is 19 years old, single, and unemployed. He has a number of previous convictions starting from 2011 for crimes which involved the use of violence or threats of violence. In 2012 he was convicted of burglary and theft and in 2016 he was convicted of escape from lawful custody.
5. The supplementary pre-sentence report dated 16 January 2019, shows that the accused was a participant in the rehabilitation programmes of the Alcohol and Drugs Court (ADC) from 8 June 2018 but was exited from the ADC due to his present offending. The supplementary pre-sentence report also shows that the attempts by the probation service to obtain a character testimonial for the accused from members of his family were unsuccessful as the accused’s family has disregarded him because of his poor attitude.
6. Sentences of supervision had been imposed on some of the accused’s previous offences. He was also placed in the rehabilitation programmes of the ADC in June 2018. However, the accused has continued to reoffend. The probation service has therefore recommended that the accused is unsuitable for any further community based sentence.

The aggravating features relating to the offending

7. The following features are aggravating of the accused’s offending:
   • (a) home invasion,
   • (b) value of the stolen and damaged properties,
   • (c) these offences were committed while the accused was a participant of the ADC’s rehabilitation programmes.

The aggravating features relating to the accused as offender

8. The only aggravating feature relating to the accused as offender is his previous convictions.

The mitigating features relating to the accused as offender

9. The only mitigating feature relating to the accused as offender is his guilty plea.

Discussion

10. For present purposes, I will consider the burglary and theft offending separately from the intentional damage offending as the two offendings occurred about twelve hours apart and are of a different kind.
11. Having regard to the aggravating features relating to the burglary and theft offending, I will take 10 months as the starting point for sentence, I will add on 2 months for previous convictions. That increases the starting point to 12 months. I will then deduct 3 months for the guilty plea. That leaves 9 months.
12. The accused is convicted and sentenced to 9 months imprisonment on each of the burglary and theft charges. Both sentences to be concurrent. That means, the accused will serve a total sentence of 9 months imprisonment on the burglary and theft charges.
13. Having regard to the gravity of the intentional damage charge, I will take a starting point for sentence of 4 months, I will add on 2 months for previous convictions. That increases the starting point to 6 months. I will deduct 2 months for the guilty plea. That leaves 4 months.
14. The accused is convicted and sentenced to 4 months imprisonment on the intentional damage charge.

Result

15. The sentences of 9 months and 4 months imprisonment are to be cumulative. That means a total sentence of 13 months imprisonment. To avoid the risk of double counting any of the aggravating features, I will deduct one month from that sentence. That leaves a total sentence of 12 months imprisonment to be served by the accused.
16. Any time the accused has spent in custody pending the outcome of this matter is to be further deducted from the end sentence of 12 months imprisonment.

CHIEF JUSTICE