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

State v Baleisuva [2012] FJMC 87; Criminal Case 188.2012 (9 May 2012)

IN THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF FIJI ISLANDS
AT SUVA

Criminal Case No: - 188/2012

THE STATE

V

SEMI BALEISUVA

For Prosecution : - Mr Shivendra Nath (for DPP)
Accused - In person

SENTENCE

1. You Semi Baleisuva, was convicted by this court, for the offence of 'Attempted Aggravated Robbery', which is punishable under Section 311 (1) (a) read with section 44 of the Crimes Decree No 44 of 2009, entailed a punishment up to 20 years of imprisonment.
   
2. Initially the case submitted to High Court as the charge was an indictable offence. The High Court remitted the case to the magistrate's court with its extended jurisdiction under section 4(2) of the Criminal Procedure Decree 2009.
   
3. Conviction had been entered subsequent to your "plea of guilty" on 13th of March 2012. The Court is satisfied that you were fully comprehended the legal effects of your plea and you acted voluntarily and free from influence.
   
4. The Court granted permission for an amendment to be made as the date of the 'summery of facts' that was presented by the prosecution was incorrect. The amendment had been explained and you admitted the same on 02.05.2012.
   
5. The Summary of facts revealed that the offence was committed on 29th January 2012 at around 12 noon in Foster Street, Walu Bay, Suva.
   
6. Further, the summery of facts revealed that, you and another (unknown to the Prosecution) have approached the victim who was standing on the road. You have surrounded the victim and then punched. The victim fell on the ground. You and your companion searched the pockets of the victim. By doing this you tried to grab the wallet and his mobile phone.
   
7. It was not easy as the victim held on to his belongings tightly.
   
8. This was the time that a Fire officer (PW2) arrived at the scene. The victim had been fortunate to have the assistance of the Fire officer. He not only saved the victim but detained the two offenders until the arrival of the police.
   
9. Later you had been arrested by the Totoga police station. You were positively identified by the victim and admitted the allegation leveled in your interview under caution.
   

Aggravating Factors

10. These are some of the notable aggravating features of your offence.
    
    1. The victim had been a by-stander on a public road,
    2. The victim was punched during the incident,
    3. The offence committed during broad daylight.
       

Mitigating Factors

11. At the same time following facts could be considered as mitigating factors in your favor,
    
    1. Early guilty plea,
    2. Sole breadwinner,
    3. Married with four children,
    4. Remorse,
       
12. The offence of Aggravated robbery is becoming a serious problem and warrants great judicial intervention. The increasing crime rate of this nature has made the society vulnerable and unsecured place.
    
13. I have adequately considered the general principles of 'Sentencing' at Section 15 (3) of the Sentencing and Penalties Decree and objective of sentencing under section 4 (1) and 4 (2) of the Sentencing and Penalties Decree.
    
14. Pursuant to section 4 (1) of the Sentencing and Penalties Decree, the purpose of sentencing an accused person is to punish offenders to an extent and in a manner which is just in all the circumstance, to protect the community from offenders, to deter offenders or other persons from committing offences of the same or similar nature, more importantly the to signify that the Court and the community denounce the commission of such offences.
    

Tariff for the offences

15. Hon; Justice Goundar in State vs Mataiasi Bulivou Susu [2010] FJHC HAC054.2010; HA0; HAC055.2010; HAC056.2010 (2 July 2010) found that organized gang robberies attract the sentence of 8-14 year imprisonment.
    
16. Her ladyship Justice Shameem in Seseu v State 2003, FJHC 224, HAM0043J, 2003S, (10 December 2003) found that the tariff for robbery with violence is 4-7 years. Justice Shameem in Sakiusa Basa vs. the State (Criminal Appeal AAU 24/, held that "'Sentences for robberies involving firearms should range frx to eight years. A lower range of four to seven years is appropriate where firearms are nore not used and the premises are banks, or shops, post offices or service stations. However, the sentence may be higher where the victim or victims are particularly vulnerable due to age, infirmity, disability or where children are involved. Similarly where injuries are caused in the course of the robbery, a higher sentence will be justified. The value of the property stolen, evidence of planning or premeditation, multiple offences and previous convictions for similar offences should be considered aggravating features. The sentence may be reduced where the offender has no previous convictions, has pleaded guilty and has expressed remorse. This list of aggravating and mitigating features is by no means exhaustive. Furthermore, the sentence will always be adjusted up or down, depending on the facts of the particular case'
    
17. Justice Goundar in Susu's case (),pras summarized the guid guiding principles in sentencing in cases involving robbery. They are:' From these authorities, the following principles emerge. The dominant factor in assessiriousfor any types of s of robberobbery is the degree of force used or threatened. The degree of injury to the victim or the nature of and duration of threats are also relevant in assessing the seriousness of an offence of robbery with violence. If a weapon is involved in the use or threat of force that will always be an important aggravating feature. Group offending will aggravate an offence because the level of intimidation and fear caused to the victim will be greater. It may also indicate planning and gang activity. Being the ringleader in a group is an aggravating factor. If the victims are vulnerable, such as elderly people and persons providing public transport, then that will be an aggravating factor. Other aggravating factors may include the value of items taken and the fact that an offence was committed whilst the offender was on bail.
    

The seriousness of an offence of robbery is mitigated by factors such as a timely guilty plea, clear evidence of remorse, ready co-operation with the police, response to previous sentences, personal circumstances of the offender, first offence of violence, voluntary return of property taken, playing a minor part, and lack of planning involved.