Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback National Court of Papua New Guinea

State v Kopsy [1998] PGNC 51; N1829 (18 June 1998)

Unreported National Court Decisions

N1829

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO. 531 OF 1998

CR NO. 621 OF 1998
THE STATE
V
SAMUEL TONY KOPSY

Goroka

Sawong J
16 June 1998
18 June 1998

Case Cited

Gimble v The State [- 89]R 2711

Counsel

R. Johnson, for the State

J. Hasu, for the Accused

18 June 1998

SAWONG J: You were charged with one count of armed robbery and one count of escaping from lawful custody, offences which are contrary to s. 386 (2) and s. 139 of the Code. You pleaded guiltyoth cs.&ges. The offence of armed ro atry attracts a ts a maximum term of life imprisonment, whilst the offence of escaping att a minimum sentence of 5 years imprisonment.

The facts of these charge are as followollows. Yre convicted and was serv serving a term of 7 years IHL at Bundaira CIS. On the 8 October 1997,and and some other prisoners broke out of the jail and esc Whiou were on the run you you together with a frienfriend of yours committed the armed robbery at the KKB Renbo store at Kain&#160 facts of that roat robbery are as follows.

On 5 December 1997, at about half past fast four, you and a friend of yours went into the KKB Renbo store at Kainantu. After you went into tore, ore, you and your friend then hide yourselves by going up and lying on the top of the large freezer units. You waited ther when the sthe store was closed and the employees of the shre cleaning up, you and youd your friend, armed with a bush knife and a small knife, went from section by section holding up the saidoyees. Then using a sg a sticky, ape, you and your friend tied up the hands of each employee at their backs. Whilst one of you watch ovch over the victims, the other one using a crowbar and a pinchbar broke open the safe. You and your friend then scash money totalling K31,950.74 from the safe and then escaped, leaving the victims inside side the shop.

You are a single man about 20 years old. Both of yorents are alive live and living in Alotau. You hYou have four ss and and you are the only boy in your family. You were educat grade 8 at 8 at the Bumayong High School, Lae.

When I gave you an opportunity to spo the Court, you told the court that you had nothing to sayo say and would leave it to your lawyer to speak on your behalf.

She referred me to the case of Gimble v The State [1988 - 89] PNGLR 271. The Supreme Courthat case case set out various sentencing guidelines for various different kinds of armed robbery cases. The Supreme Court there thid there are basically f4) different types of armed robbery cases. These are, are, robbery oo a house, robbery of a bank, armed robbery of a store or acle on the road and a street robbery. She told the cohe court that your case would fall in the third category, that of armed ro of store. She submitubmitted that a you had pleaded guilty, that you had helped the police in recovering ha the moneyentolgettor ther ther with other properties you had stolen, that none of the victims had actually been in, a se a sentenceess t yearrisonment should be imposed.

I accept that you have pleaded guil guilty.&#ty. 160; I also acchat you hadu had co-operateh the police during their investigations and led them to thto the place where the money was recovered. I also note in that regaat you readily made admissions to the police about your ownr own involvement. And so your plea of gubefo before me to the two oes are consistent with your co-operation with the police. Therefore sider your pour pour pleas to be a genuine one.

You prior records of convictions which I must take into considensideration. You have two prior convictions, one for armed robbery ae other one for escaping.&#ng. For tmed robbery, you were were convicted by the National Court in Lae on 13 May 1995 and was seed to 2 years IHL. On 13 March 1996,were conv convictnvicted and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment by the National Court in Lae for escaping.

In these circumstances, you cannot be treated as a first offender. You obviousve not learnt, rnt, from being sent to jail. It is quite clear that soat society needs to be protected from people like you. e circumstances, not accepaccept the submission on the range of sentence made by e by your counsel.

In my view the fact that you prior convictions and sees for armed robbery and escaping are aggravating factors, ors, which calls for a higher sentence to be imposed on you. Except he facts that you hyou have pleaded guilty and co-operated with the police and readily making admissions, there are no other mitng factors to be taken into your favour.

What has concerned me, is what is the approappropriate sentence to be imposed in the circumstance of your cases. There is a further consideration as to whether the sentence should be made concurrent or cumulative, not only to the present two cases but also to the sentences which you were serving at the time you escaped.

The crf armed robbery is serious,ious, violent and prevalent crime. Tore, in my view an immedimmediate punitive and deterrent custodial sentence is called for.

You must understand that the two offences for which I have convicted you are two different off. They are not relateelated. Bving said that, it is stis still up to the court to decide how you are to be sentenced.

In all the circumstances for the offence of armed robbery, you are sentenced to 6 years imprisonment in hard labour. For the offof escaping youg you are sentenced to 5 years IHL. Even though wo offences ares are not related, nevertheless, I think thaall the circumstances of your case, if I were to make the sentences cumulative, you would buld be positively damaged. In the citanceorder that shat sentenentence of 5 years for the escape charge be made and served.

As you are already a prisoner serving, there will be no deductions for the time spent in custody.

As the offences for whir which you are before this court are different from the ones you arving, ing, the term I have imposed shall be made cumulative.

I have considered the totalling principle in my view the total effective sentence is not excessive nor unreasonable. It folthat you must serve erve the following term I have imposed.

Lawyers for the Accused: Public Solicitor

Lawyers for the State: State Prosecutor