SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Afoa [2015] WSSC 107

Case name: 	Police v Afoa	
		
Citation: 	[2015] WSSC 107	
		
Decision date: 	29 September 2015	
		
Parties: 	POLICE v LAUINA PULEITU AFOA male of Lotofagā, Safata.

Hearing date(s): 		
		
File number(s): 	S2599/15	
		
Jurisdiction: 	CRIMINAL	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Chief Justice Sapolu	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	-	The accused is convicted and sentenced to 8 months supervision and ordered to perform 45 hours community work.	
		
Representation: 	F Lagaaia for
Accused in person

Catchwords: 	Theft - 	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013,s.161 (a) s.165 (b)	
		
Cases cited:		
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

FILE NO:  S2599/15

BETWEEN

P  O  L  I  C  E

Prosecution

A  N  D

LAUINA PULEITU AFOA male of Lotofagā, Safata.

Accused

Counsel:	F Lagaaia for
Accused in person

Sentence:	29 September 2015

S  E N  T  E  N  C  E
The charge
1. 	The accused Lauina Puleitu Afoa is a 34 year old male of Lotofagā, Safata.  He appears for sentence on one charge of theft, contrary to s.161 (a) of the Crimes Act 2013, which carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment pursuant to s.165 (b).  To the charge, he pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.
2. 	The prosecution’s summary of facts, admitted by the accused, shows that on Friday night 7 August 2015, the Mormon Church held a function at Lotofagā, Safata.  Many people of the village, including the accused and the complainant, attended the function.
3. 	As the complainant with other women of the village were busy preparing the food for the guests, she gave her mobile to a friend to take photos of that night.  The complainant’s friend for some unexplained reason forgot the phone on a chair at where the function was being held.  Someone at the function saw the accused walk towards the chair and picked up the phone.  This person approached the accused and told him to give the phone to the bishop of the church to announce whether someone was looking for his/her phone.  The accused did not say anything but simply put the phone inside the left pocket of his shorts.  
4. 	Later during the function, the complainant discovered that her phone was missing and enquired of several people at the function whether someone knows about her phone.  Someone told her that her phone is with the accused.  When the complainant asked the accused about her phone he denied having it.
5. 	The complainant then reported her missing phone to the police at Lotofagā.  When the police went to the accused’s family, a relative of the accused went through the accused’s clothes he wore on the night of the function and found the complainant’s phone inside the left pocket of the accused’s shorts.  The value of the phone is $1,500.
6. 	As shown from the pre-sentence report, the accused is married with a one year old son.  His village of birth is Lotofagā, Safata but he now resides with his wife and child at Saletele, Fagaloa.  He supports his family through his plantation and by selling his earnings and handicrafts at the market.  The accused is a first offender.  The character testimonials from the accused’s mother, the bishop of his church, and the pulenuu of Saletele, Fagaloa, show that he had been a person of good character prior to the commission of the present offence.
7. 	Counsel for the prosecution in his sentencing memorandum submits that previous relevant authorities suggest a non-custodial sentence for this case.  Having regard to the circumstances of the offending and of the accused as offender, I agree.  The accused is convicted and sentenced to 8 months supervision and ordered to perform 45 hours community work. 
CHIEF JUSTICE