Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Supreme Court of Samoa

Police v Toilolo [2017] WSSC 20 (28 March 2017)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Pol v Toilolo [2017] WSSC 20

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

S2244/16
S2286/16

BETWEEN

P O L I C E

Prosecution

A N D
PELESASA TUPE TOILOLO male of Maluafou and Mulivai, Safata

Accused

Counsel:
O Tagaloa for prosecution
Accused in person

Sentence: 28 March 2017

S EN T E N C E

Introduction

1. The accused Pelesasa Tupe Toilolo appears for sentence on one charge of possession of narcotics, contrary to s.7 of the Narcotics Act 1967, which carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment under s.18 (2) (b). To the charge, the accused pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.

The offending

2. According to the prosecution’s summary of facts confirmed by the accused, on 8 November 2016 in the afternoon, a member of the public called the police post at Faleolo that the driver of taxi registration number T2973 is suspected to be in possession of marijuana. The police stopped the taxi and accompanied it to the Faleolo police post where it was searched. Eleven marijuana joints were found wrapped inside a yellow towel.

The accused

3. The accused is a 32 year old male who is a taxidriver and planter by occupation. He is married with two young children. He is the sole provider for his family. He finished school at Year 12.
4. According to what the accused’s wife told the probation service, her husband is a loving, reliable and hardworking person. She supports him in this matter and asks for mercy on her husband. The accused is also a first offender.
5. The accused told the probation service that even though marijuana substances were found in his taxi, he is not a user of drugs. I have doubts about that. He also expressed remorse to the Court and to the probation service.

The Alcohol and Drugs Court (ADC)

6. After the accused pleaded guilty to the charge, he was referred to the ADC clinician for an assessment and report back to the Court. Even though the clinician in her report recommended a further assessment and possible consideration for ADC determination, the accused was found not to be eligible for the programmes of the ADC because he claims not to be a user of marijuana.

The aggravating and mitigating features

7. In relation to the offending, the only feature that is of an aggravating nature is the number of marijuana joints found in the accused’s possession. In relation to the accused as offender, there is no aggravating feature. But there are mitigating features. He has been a person of good character prior to the commission of this offence and he has pleaded guilty to the charge against him at the earliest opportunity. This is also consistent with his expression of remorse to the Court and to the probation service.

Discussion

8. The ADC and its therapeutic programmes are an attempt by the Samoan Courts to combat the problem of reoffending in relation to alcohol and drugs related offences. The revolving door policy which involves sending alcohol and drugs related offenders to prison but when some of those those people come out they reoffend again has been of very serious concern for many years. Likewise the high incidence of alcohol and drugs related offences. The ADC is a new sentencing technique aimed at those concerns and it is at present at a trial stage. It is focused on treatment and rehabilitation.
9. In this case, I have decided to impose a sentence of supervision and order the accused to attend the 6 week Toe Afua Se Taeao Fou ADC psycho-education programme conducted by the probation service.

Result

10. The accused is convicted and sentenced to 10 months supervision and ordered to perform 50 hours of community service as directed by the probation service. During the accused’s term of supervision he is also to attend the 6 week Toe Afua Se Taeao Fou ADC psycho-education programme conducted by the probation service.

CHIEF JUSTICE