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

State v Koroi - Sentence [2022] FJHC 158; HAC009.2022 (20 April 2022)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI

AT SUVA

[CRIMINAL JURISDICTION]

CRIMINAL CASE NO. HAC 009 OF 2022

STATE

V

SAKARAIA KOROI

Counsel: Ms M Naidu for the State

Ms T Kean for the Accused

Date of Hearing: 24 March 2022
Date of Sentence: 20 April 2022

SENTENCE

[1] The Accused has pleaded guilty to a charge of attempted aggravated robbery. The offence carries the same maximum penalty as the substantive offence.

[2] The facts are that on 24 December 2021 at around 12 noon, the Accused entered the dwelling home of the victim armed with a knife and demanded money from her. He disguised his identity by covering his head with a t-shirt. Upon seeing the Accused the victim screamed for help. He grabbed her and covered her mouth to stop her for screaming. He kept demanding money from her and when she agreed to give him money, he released her. She ran outside and fell on the concrete driveway and injured herself. The neighbours heard her call for help. They chased and caught the accused. They assaulted him and then handed him to police.

[3] The Accused is 23 years old and married with two young children. He is a roadside coconut seller. On 24 December 2021 he went to Samabula to pick coconuts to sell when he saw an opportunity to steal from the victim’s home. He said that he was overwhelmed that it was Christmas Eve and that he did not have money to spend for Christmas. He did not plan to commit the offence.

[4] The offence is objectively serious. The statutory aggravation is that the Accused was armed with a weapon when he committed the offence.

[5] The aggravating features are that the offence was during a home invasion and that the Accused covered his head with a cloth to conceal his identity.

[6] The mitigating factors are that the Accused entered an early guilty plea and is remorseful. He is a first time offender. His guilty plea has saved court’s time and resources.

[7] There is no established tariff for attempted aggravated robbery and it would be wrong in principle to apply the tariff of 8 to 16 years imprisonment endorsed by the Supreme Court in Wise v State [2015] FJSC 7; CAV0004.2015 (24 April 2015) for armed or gang robbery committed during a home invasion resulting in serious physical injuries to the occupants.

[8] In the past, sentences ranged from 3 to 5 years imprisonment for attempted aggravated robbery:

State v Boladrau - Sentence [2020] FJHC 759; HAC110.2019 (15 September 2020) - 4 years and 8 months imprisonment.

State v Gonekalou - Sentence [2018] FJHC 1018; HAC332.2018 (22 October 2018) - 4 years imprisonment.

State v Naivalubasaga - Sentence [2018] FJHC 1103; HAC246.2018 (21 November 2018) - 3 years imprisonment.

State v Bola - Sentence [2018] FJHC 274; HAC73.2018 (12 April 2018) - 4 years imprisonment.

[9] In the present case, the victim sustained some minor bruises when she fell down while trying to escape from the Accused. The duration of the attack was short.

[10] However, entering a dwelling home armed with a weapon and demanding money from the occupant is a serious crime. The court’s duty is to denounce such crime and impose sentence that has the effect of deterrence on the Accused and other likeminded people.

[11] The Accused has spent one month in custody on remand.

[12] After taking all these matters into account, the Accused is convicted and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.

[13] I now consider whether I should suspend the whole or any part of the sentence due to the punishment he received from the public.

[14] In DPP v Jolame Pita

"Onceur court has reached the decision that a sentence of imprist isnwarranted thed there must be specircumstances to juto justify a nsion, sun, such as an offender of comparatively good character who is not considsuitaor, oneed of probation, and who commits a re a relativlatively isolated offence of a moderately tely serious nature, but not involving violence. Or there may be other cogent reasons such as the extreme youth or age of the offender, or the circumstances of the offenc for example, ple, the misappropriation of a modest sum not involving a breach of trust, or the commission of some other isd offof dishonesty particularly where the offender has not undergone a previous s160;sentenentence&#1 impriimprisonment in the relevant past. These examples are not to be taken as either inclusive or exclusive, as sentence ds in cach case on the cula cular circumstances of the offence and thender,nder, ber, but they are intended to illustrate that, to justify the suspension of60;see of sonment, there must be f be factors rens renderindering immediate imprisonment inappropriate."