SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Sei [2013] WSSC 17

Case name: Police v Sei
Citation: [2013] WSSC 17
Decision date: 23 April 2013
Parties: Police and Fetaui Sei
Hearing date(s): 
File number(s): S141/2013
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Place of delivery: Mulinuu
Judge(s): Justice Vaai
On appeal from:
Order: (Sentence)
Representation: 
Phaedra Valoia for prosecution
Accused in person
Catchwords: 
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P  O  L  I  C  E
Prosecution

A  N  D:

FETAUI SEI male of Aleisa
Defendant

Counsel:	Phaedra Valoia for prosecution
Accused in person

Sentence:	23 April 2013

S  E  N  T  E  N  C  E

1.	As a result of police search of the defendant’s land at Aleisa on the 31st January 2013, 51 plants of cannabis sativa ranging from 10 inches to 31 inches were discovered and uprooted.  Both cannabis and the defendant were taken to the Apia Police Station where the defendant was questioned and charged with cultivation of prohibited plant.  He was then remanded in custody.
2.	At mentions on the 11th February 2013 he pleaded guilty and was again remanded in custody for sentence.  He has previous convictions.  Two of those previous convictions were for similar offending in 1997.
Prosecution Submissions
3.	Prosecution suggests a term of imprisonment of not less than 5 years.  It emphasised that the cultivation of the prohibited plants in a large quantity was obviously for a commercial purpose.  
4.	It is also suggested that the defendant’s previous conviction is an indication that his present offending reflects his lack of remorse and unwillingness to comply with the warning given by the court in his previous appearances.  He was not deterred.
5.	Prosecution urged the court to impose a substantial custodial sentence to warn potential drug users and particularly drug dealers that they will be held accountable and will be severely punished.
Defendant’s Submissions
6.	Defence submitted that the defendant is truly remorseful.  His time in custody awaiting his sentence has enabled him to reflect on the advise tendered to him by his wife which he should have absorbed instead of tagging along with his drug addicted friends.
7.	The defendant, as counsel submitted, is a hard working planter, living on 4 acres land at Aleisa which he has planted with crops and vegetables which he sold at the Apia market.  He is 51 years old with 5 children ranging from 23 to 5 years old.  He also holds a matai title from his mother’s village of Saanapu.  
8.	He is described as a loving and caring husband and he also realised the impact his offending will have on his wife and family.
The Probation Report 
9.	The probation report described the defendant as a first offender which is not true; it also says the cultivation of the cannabis plants was not for a commercial purpose which again is also not correct.
Discussion
10.	Cultivation of 51 plants of cannabis plants was obviously for a commercial purpose.  Cultivation of this large quantity is at the root of the illicit drug offending.
11.	His previous convictions for which he was given custodial sentences in 1997 would have given the unconditional warning that imprisonment sentence would the court’s response to cultivation of prohibited drugs.  He has chosen to ignore those warnings.  By his own admissions through his counsel he has chosen to ignore also the advice of his wife and family.
12.	He must be prepared to face the reality of the life and direction he has chosen to take.
13.	The sentence as the prosecution correctly submitted must convey a clear message that those involved in drugs and the illicit drug trade must be dealt with severely.  Society has no place for drug dealers.
14.	The only issue here is the length of the custodial sentence to be imposed.  The maximum sentence imposed by law is 14 years imprisonment.  Given the quantity of the plants I consider 4 ½ years as the appropriate starting point.  For his previous convictions I will add 12 months.  But for his early guilty plea I will deduct 18 months.
Result
The defendant is sentenced to 4 years imprisonment to commence from the 31st January 2013.