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

State v Bulituraga [2016] FJMC 124; Criminal Case 1258.2016 (30 August 2016)

IN THE MAGISTRATES’ COURT OF FIJI

AT SUVA

Criminal Case No: - 1258/2016

STATE

V

SEVANAIA ANDREW BULITURAGA

For the Prosecution : Inspector Suli

For the Accused: Mr.Vuki(LAC)

Date of Sentence : 30^thof August 2016

SENTENCE

1. SEVANAIA ANDREW BULITURAGA, you were charged with one count of Theft, contrary to section 291(1) of the Crimes Decree.
2. You pleaded guilty and admitted the summary of facts presented by the Prosecution. According to facts between the 31^st day of December 2015 to 01^st January 2016 you stole 1x hasgavana 288 chainsaw valued at $3200.00 and 1xhasgavana 272 chainsaw valued at $2800.00 from the complainant who is your step father .
3. I am satisfied about your plea was voluntarily and unequivocal .Accordingly I convict you forthis offence.
4. Maximum penalty for Theft is 10 years imprisonment.
5. The tariff was outlined in the case of Ratusili v State [2012] FJHC 1249; HAA011.2012 (1 August 2012) where his Lordship Justice Madigan said :

(i) for a first offence of simple theft the sentencing range should be between 2 and 9 months.

(ii) any subsequent offence should attract a penalty of at least 9 months.

(iii) 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.

(iv) regard should be had to the nature of the relationship between offender and victim.

(v) planned thefts will attract greater sentences than opportunistic thefts.

6. In LaisiasaKoroivuki v the State ( Criminal Appeal AAU 0018 of 2010)the Fiji Court of Appeal discussed the guiding principles for determining the starting point in sentencing and observed :

"In selecting a starting point, the court must have regard to an objective seriousness of the offence. No reference should be made to the mitigating and aggravating factors at this time. As a matter of good practice, the starting point should be picked from the lower or middle range of the tariff. After adjusting for the mitigating and aggravating factors, the final term should fall within the tariff. If the final term falls either below or higher than the tariff, then the sentencing court should provide reasons why the sentence is outside the range".

7. Considering the objective seriousness of the offence, I select 05 months as the starting point.
8. You stole these items from your home where you are staying and thus betrayed the trust of the complainant. This I consider as aggravating factor and add 03 months to reach 08 months imprisonment.
9. In his mitigation the counsel submitted that you are 23 years old, single, first offender and one item was already recovered. You are prepared to restitute. For these mitigating factors I deduct 02 months to reach 06 months imprisonment. You pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and deserve full credit. Accordingly I deduct 1/3 to reach 04 months imprisonment. Now I have to consider whether to suspend your sentence. It has been held that young, first offenders need to be given a chance to rehabilitate and I apply that principle also for this case.
10. SEVANAIA ANDREW BULITURAGA, I sentence you to 04 months imprisonment for the offence of Theft contrary to section 291(1) of the Crimes Decree and suspend this for 02 years. Also you have to pay $2800.00 in restitution.
11. If you commit any offences during next 02 years you can be charge under section 28 of the Sentencing and Penalties Decree.
12. 28 days to appeal.

ShageethSomaratne

Resident Magistrate