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

State v Sevula [2013] FJMC 126; Criminal Case1927.2012 (6 March 2013)

IN THE REPUBLIC OF FIJI ISLANDS

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT
AT SUVA
(Under Extended Jurisdiction Pursuant to Section 4 (2) of The Criminal Procedure Decree 2009)

Criminal Case No: 1927/12

State

.V.

Pio Sevula

Prosecution : Mr A Paka – DPP’s Office
Accused : Present – in Person

SENTENCE

Pio Sevula this is your sentence. The High Court has granted this Court extended Jurisdiction to try this case. You have pleaded guilty, on your own free will to the following charge:
Statement of offence (a)

AGGRAVATED ROBBERY: Contrary to Section 311 (1) (a) of the Crimes Decree Number: 44 of 2009.

Particulars of offence (b)

Pio Sevula, on the 30th day of December, 2012 at Suva in the Central Division, robbed Robin Dutt off his 1 x Silver Samsung Mobile Phone valued at $300 and 1 x Black Alcatel Mobile Phone valued at $10 all to the total value of $310 the property of Robin Dutt.

Pio Sevula you have admitted the statement of facts as read out by the prosecutor on your own free will. You have mitigated and this Court has noted your mitigation.

The maximum sentence for this offence is 20 years imprisonment.

The Supreme Court in Guston Kean CAV 0015.2010 set the tariff for this offence at between six and fourteen years imprisonment and recent sentences for domestic robberies have been between ten and sixteen years (Rasaqio HAC 155/07; Rokonabete HAC 118/07; Vasuca HAC 41 of 2009L).
In State v Rokonabete[2008[ FJHC 226: HAC 118.2007(15th September 2008) Justice Goundar itemized elements to be considered when assessing the seriousness for any types of robbery:

"The dominant factor in assessing seriousness for any types of robbery 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 treat of force that will always be an important aggravating feature. Group offending will aggregate 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 person providing public transport, that will be an aggravating factor. Other aggravating factors may include the volume of items taken and the fact that an offence was committed whist 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 sentence , personal circumstances of offender, first offence of violence, voluntary of property taken, a minor part, and lack of planning involved."

In State V Manoa [2010]FJHC 409:HAC 061.2010(6th August 2010),the learned judge employed the sentencing tariff for the offence of Robbery with Violence from the old Penal Code when sentencing for the offence of Aggravated Robbery in the new Crimes Decree No: 44 of 2009.

"The maximum penalty for robbery with violence under Penal Code is life imprisonment, while the maximum penalty for aggravated a robbery under the Crimes Decree is 20 years imprisonment. Although the maximum sentence under the Decree has been reduced to 20 years imprisonment, in my judgment, the tariff of 8-14 years imprisonment established under the old law can continue to apply under the new law. I hold this for two reasons. Firstly, the established tariff of 8-14 years under the old law falls below the maximum sentence of 20 years under new law. Secondly, under the new law, aggravated robbery is made an indictable offence, triable only in the High Court, which means the Executive's intention is to continue to treat the offence seriously"

I adopt the tariff for the offences of Aggravated Robbery as set out here-in.

This Court takes a starting point of 6 years (lower end of the scale). For your guilty plea this Court gives 2 years discount and further 1 year discount for your mitigation. Your sentence for Aggravated Robbery is 3 years imprisonment.

This Court has also noted that the property in this case has not been recovered.
Pio Sevula you are a 1st offender and a young person. You have spent about 3 months in remand. This Court will deduct that time spent in custody. Your sentence now is 2 years 9 months. You would surely have reflected upon your actions and this Court hopes that you would have learnt a lesson that if you assault others and steal others property you will be given custodial sentence. A person in this Country work hard to acquire assets and it is for their enjoyment and not for people like you. We also seek to rid our streets of people like you, so everyone can walk around freely without fear of being mugged. This Court wishes to give you a chance but is not in a position to suspend your sentence which is in excess of 2 years. However this Court would sentence you to 9 months imprisonment and the balance of the 2 years is suspended for 2 years. Which means that if you re-offend within the next 2 years after serving your 9 months term you might be prosecuted for breach of your suspended sentence and you will then serve a term of 2 years for this case.
Any party aggrieved with this sentence has 30 days (from today) to appeal this sentence in the Fiji Court of Appeal.
9 months sentence imprisonment. (Taking the 3 months you have spent in custody you will have spent 12 months in total). The message is simple you commit aggravated robbery you will get custodial sentence.
Balance term 2 years/ suspended for 2 years. 28 days to appeal.

Chaitanya Lakshman
Resident Magistrate

6th March 2013