Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Fiji

  Download original PDF

State v Latianara - Sentence [2021] FJHC 65; HAC326.2020 (5 February 2021)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Crim. Case No: HAC 326 of 2020

BETWEEN:
STATE

PROSECUTION

A N D:

1. RATU JONE LATIANARA

2. SEMI VAKARU

ACCUSED PERSONS

Counsel : Ms. S. Komaibaba for the State
Ms. S. Hazelman for both Accused

Date of Sentence : 05^th February 2021

SENTENCE

1. Mr. Ratu Jone Latianara and Mr. Semi Vakaru, both of you pleaded guilty to one count of Aggravated Burglary, contrary to Section 313 (1) (a) of the Crimes Act, which carries a maximum sentence of seventeen years imprisonment, and one count of Theft, contrary to Section 291 (1) of the Crimes Act, which carries a maximum sentence of ten years imprisonment. The particular of the offences are that:
   

FIRST COUNT

Statement of Offence

AGGRAVATED BURGLARY: Contrary to Section 313 (1) (a) of the Crimes Act 2009.

Particulars of Offence

RATU JONE LATIANARA and SEMI VAKARU between the 5^th day of November 2020 to the 6^th day of November 2020 at Nausori, in the Eastern Division, entered into the dwelling house of RATU EPELI NAILATIKAU as a trespasser, with intent to commit theft.

SECOND COUNT

Statement of Offence

THEFT: Contrary to Section 291 (1) of the Crimes Act 2009.

Particulars of Offence

RATU JONE LATIANARA and SEMI VAKARU between the 5^th day of November 2020 to the 6^th day of November 2020 at Nausori in the Eastern Division, dishonestly appropriated 6 x mats (coco), 2 x Togan mats, 1 x Fotanga (Masi), 3 x Gatu (Masi), 2 x mats (vivivi), 8 x single mats, the property of RATU EPELI NAILATIKAU with the intention of permanently depriving RATU EPELI NAILATIKAU of the said property.

2. Satisfied by the fact that you have fully comprehended the legal effect of your plea and your plea was voluntary and free from influence, I now convict both of you to these offences of Aggravated Burglary and Theft.
   
3. According to the summary of facts, which you admitn open court, Ratu Jone Latianara had entered the house through the back window of the hous house, while Semi Vakaru was waiting outside. Ratu Jone Latianara had passed the stolen items to Semi Vakaru and then transported the stolen items to the main island by a boat. You have then sold the stolen items at the Suva Flea Market.
   
4. This is a breaking of a residential property and stealing therein. You broke into thise while the owner was away. The crimes of this nature, whic which are targeting the dwelling houses, undoubtedly affect the entire community. You have instilled fear and insecurity among the people by committing this crime. I, accordingly, find this is a severe offence.
   
5. Having considered the serious nature of these offences, I now proceed to determine an appropriate sentence for you in line with general principles, objectives, and purposes of sentencing under sections 4 (1) and 4 (2) and 15 of the Sentencing and Penalties Act.
   
6. All of these offences are founded on the same series of offending. Therefore, I find it is appropriate to impose an aggregate sentence pursuant to Section 17 of the Sentencing and Penalties Act.
   
7. The tariff for the offence of Aggravated Burglary is between 18 months to 3 years. The tariff for the offen Thof Theft has been stipulated in Ratusili v State [2012] FJHC 1249>HAA011.2012 (1 August 2012), where Justice Mice Madigan held that:
   
   1. For a first offence of simple Theft the sentencing range should be between 2 and 9 months.
      
   2. Any subsequent offence should attract a penalty of at least 9 months.
      
   3. Theft of large sums of money and thefts in breach of trust, whether first offence or not can attract sentences of up to three years.
      
   4. Regard should be had to the nature of the relationship between offender

and victim.