IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Wilson & Anor [2026] WSSC 13 (26 March 2026)

Case name: 	Police v Wilson & Anor	
		
Citation: 	[2026] WSSC 13	
		
Decision date: 	26 March 2026	
		
Parties: 	POLICE (Informant) v TANIELU WILSON, male of Moataa & SEMUFOA’I, male of Mulivai, Safata (Accused)	
		
Hearing date(s): 		
		
File number(s): 	2026-00029/SC/CR/UP & 2026-00030/SC/CR/UP	
		
Jurisdiction: 	Supreme Court – CRIMINAL	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Justice Leutele Mata Tuatagaloa	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	•	Accordingly, Tanielu Wilson is convicted and sentenced to 27 months’ imprisonment or 2 years and 3 months for each offence, to be served concurrently, less any time already spent in custody
•	The defendant, Semu Foa’i is convicted and sentenced as follows:
(i)	Possession of methamphetamine – 15 months’ imprisonment.
(ii)	Possession of loose marijuana leaves – 8 months’ imprisonment.
Both sentences are to be served concurrently, less any time already spent in custody.

Representation: 	T Fesili for Prosecution
A Lesa for both Accused	
		
Catchwords: 	Possession of narcotics, unlawful cultivation, methamphetamine, pleaded guilty, prior conviction, reoffended, aggravating features, banishment and village fine imposed	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:	Narcotics Act 1967 s.7(1)(a), s.18(a)(b), s.6(1)(b)	
		
Cases cited:	Police v Tevaga [2016] WSSC 38
R v Fatu [2005] NZCA 278; [2006] 2 NZLR 72
R v Power [1973] 2 NZLR 617 (CA)	
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Informant

A N D:

TANIELU WILSON, male of Moataa

AND

SEMU FOA’I, male of Mulivai, Safata.

Accused

Counsel:	T Fesili for Prosecution
A Lesa for both Accused

Date:		26 March 2026

SENTENCING OF TUATAGALOA J
1. 	The two accused, Tanielu Wilson and Semu Foa’i, are individually charged under the Narcotics Act 1967 as follows:
Tanielu Wilson
(i) 	Possession of Class B narcotic namely Sativa L cannabis (marijuana leaves) weighing 4.8grams pursuant to s.7(1)(a) with a penalty of maximum 14 years’ imprisonment under s.18(a)(b); and
(ii) 	Unlawful cultivation of Class B narcotic namely Sativa L cannabis (190 marijuana seeds) pursuant to s.6(1)(b) with a penalty of maximum 14 years’ imprisonment under s.18(a)(b).
Semu Foa’i
(i) 	Possession of a Class A narcotic, namely methamphetamine (“ice”) found in one (1) zip lock plastic bag weighing 0.02grams pursuant to s.7(1)(a) with a penalty of life imprisonment under s.18(a)(a); and
(ii) 	Possession of Class B narcotic namely Sativa L cannabis (marijuana leaves) weighing 2.82grams pursuant to s.7(1)(a) with a penalty of maximum 14 years’ imprisonment under s.18(a)(b).
2. 	The two accused have pleaded guilty and they now appear for sentence.
The Offending
3. 	The summary of facts, as accepted by Counsel for both accused, records that on 27 December 2025 Police executed a search warrant at the residence of Tanielu Wilson in Moataa. Present at the property were the two accused and one other individual. A body search of Tanielu revealed marijuana substances in his pocket. A backpack located in the kitchen, identified as belonging to Semu Foa’i, contained narcotic substances. Each accused is accordingly charged with possession of the substances found in their respective possession.
The Accused
Tanielu Wilson
4. 	Tanielu has a prior conviction for similar offending in September 2024, for which he was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment in November 2024. Within a year of release, he has reoffended with possession of narcotics.
5. 	The Pre-Sentence Report (PSR) notes that Tanielu is 39 years of age, has five children, resides in Moataa, and operates a mechanical workshop that supports his family.
6. 	No written testimonials were provided, save for a statement from his mother. She acknowledges his weakness and involvement with narcotics but, as parents often do, continues to support him.
7. 	The prosecution identifies the following aggravating features:
(i) 	The quantity and nature of seeds: The possession of 190 seeds is significant. This exceeds trivial possession and strongly infers cultivation and supply, extending beyond personal use.
(ii) 	Repeat offender: Tanielu has a prior conviction for possession of narcotics.
(iii) 	Prevalence: Narcotics offences are widespread in the community.
8. 	The prosecution recommends a starting point of four (4) years’ imprisonment.
9. 	Counsel for the accused acknowledges Tanielu’s recent imprisonment for possession of methamphetamine. In mitigation, Counsel submits: 
(a) 	Early guilty plea; and
(b) 	Remorse: Tanielu expressed remorse in his Pre-Sentence Report (PSR) and seeks the Court’s leniency in sentencing.
Semu Foai
10. 	Semu is 44 years’ old, from Mulivai, Safata. He is married with four children and works as a carpenter. In his PSR, Semu explained that at the time of the raid he was visiting his adopted brother, Tanielu, and was residing with him at Moataa. He admitted ownership of the narcotic substances found in his backpack and confirmed that he is a user of both methamphetamine (“ice”) and marijuana.
11. 	The prosecution identifies the following aggravating features of Semu’s offending: 
(i) 	Seriousness of Class A narcotics: Possession of Class A substances carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. Although the quantity may be small, the seriousness of the drug itself demands condemnation and general deterrence.
(ii) 	Presence of multiple narcotics: The discovery of both Class A and Class B substances indicates a broader engagement with illicit substances.
12. 	The prosecution recommends a starting point of two (2) years imprisonment.
13. 	Counsel for the accused highlights Semu’s personal circumstances and submits the following mitigating factors:
(a) 	Early guilty plea;
(b) 	Remorse;
(c) 	Banishment and village fine imposed by Mulivai, Safata; 
(d) 	First offender status.

Defence Counsel Submissions
14. 	Counsel concedes that a custodial sentence is almost inevitable for Tanielu Wilson. However, Counsel disputes the prosecution’s recommended starting point of four years, noting that it relies heavily on Tanielu’s prior conviction. That conviction has already been served and related to methamphetamine, not marijuana as in the present charges. While both are narcotic offences, Counsel refers to Police v Nikolao [2015] WSSC 43 (15 April), where the Court held that a previous conviction is not an aggravating factor of the offending itself but rather a personal aggravating factor of the offender. I agree with that distinction.
15. 	In relation to Semu Foa’i, Counsel cites Police v Leota [2024] WSSC 28 (24 May), where the Court adopted an alternative approach emphasizing rehabilitation over custodial sentencing in methamphetamine cases. However, no two cases are identical, and each must be sentenced according to its own circumstances.
16. 	Counsel for both accused ultimately submit that a starting point of two (2) years is appropriate for each accused, should the Court decline to adopt a rehabilitative alternative to custody. 
Discussion
17. 	In Police v Tevaga, Nelson J emphasized that the Court must firmly discourage such offending and do all that is possible to stamp out this growing trend before the problem becomes as entrenched in Samoan society as is the consumption of marijuana.
18. 	The increasing number of narcotics raids conducted by Police, with seizures of both marijuana and methamphetamine, demonstrates the growing prevalence of drug use. The rising number of prosecutions confirms that methamphetamine use is spreading within the community.
19. 	It is beyond dispute that methamphetamine and marijuana have become endemic in Samoa. I reiterate the pressing need for deterrence. A custodial sentence is the most appropriate response: it denounces the offending, deters others from similar conduct, and protects the wider community from the serious harms associated with narcotics.
20. 	Methamphetamine is a particularly destructive drug, highly addictive, with severe mental and physical consequences. At present, there is no treatment available in Samoa for drug addiction. A custodial sentence therefore serves a dual purpose: it prevents continued use while offenders are incarcerated and provides a measure of rehabilitation through enforced abstinence.
Sentence Imposed
21. 	I sentence the two accused as follows: 
Tanielu Wilson
(a) Possession of marijuana leaves and Possession of marijuana seeds
22. 	A sentence must not be increased merely because an offender has prior convictions, lest he be punished twice for the same offence. However, previous convictions remain relevant: they may indicate a propensity to reoffend, and in such cases the Court, in its duty to protect the public, may properly lengthen the period of confinement. In the case of Tanielu Wilson, his prior conviction and subsequent reoffending demonstrate a clear predilection to commit similar offences.
23. 	Both offences attract a maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment. I find a starting point of three years appropriate. I do not accept that Tanielu is genuinely remorseful, given his repeated involvement with narcotics. The only mitigating factor is his early guilty plea, for which I allow a 25% discount (nine months). This leaves a term of 27 months.
24. 	Accordingly, Tanielu Wilson is convicted and sentenced to 27 months’ imprisonment or 2 years and 3 months for each offence, to be served concurrently, less any time already spent in custody.
Semu Foa’i
(b) Possession of methamphetamine and Possession of marijuana loose leaves
25. 	Methamphetamine is the more serious of the two narcotics, carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. Taking a totality approach, I find a starting point of 30 months appropriate. I accept the mitigating factors advanced on Semu’s behalf and allow the following deductions: six months for being a first offender, three months for the village banishment and monetary fine, and one month for remorse. This leaves 20 months, to which I apply a 25% discount (five months) for the early guilty plea. The end sentence is 15 months or 1 year and 3 months.
26. 	The defendant, Semu Foa’i is convicted and sentenced as follows:
(i) 	Possession of methamphetamine – 15 months’ imprisonment.
(ii) 	Possession of loose marijuana leaves – 8 months’ imprisonment.
27. 	Both sentences are to be served concurrently, less any time already spent in custody.
JUSTICE LEUTELE M TUATAGALOA