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

Police v Leituala [2025] WSSC 38 (14 April 2025)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Leituala [2025] WSSC 38 (14 April 2025)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Informant

AND:

LEE FIATAMALII LEITUALA, female of Vaigaga and Luatuanuu.

Accused

Counsel: Attorney General’s Office for Prosecution

Accused appears in Person

Date: 14 April 2024

SENTENCING OF TUATAGALOA J

1. The accused, Lee Fiatamalii Leituala, pleaded guilty and appears for sentence on the following charges under the Narcotics Act 1967:
   • Possession of a Class A narcotic, namely methamphetamine (“ice or meth”) found in four (4) zip lock plastic bags weighing in total 0.97grams pursuant to s.7(1)(a) with a penalty of life imprisonment;^[1]
   • Possession of Class B narcotic namely Sativa L cannabis substances (marijuana) of loose leaves weighing 12.62grams pursuant to s.7(1)(a) with a penalty of maximum 14 years’ imprisonment;^[2] and
   • Possession of utensils one (1) broken clear glass pipe and one (1) straw^[3] with a penalty of maximum 7 years’ imprisonment or $20,000 fine or both.
2. The accused pleaded guilty to all charges on 17^th February 2025.

The offending

3. According to the summary of facts that was read out and accepted by the accused, the Police on 10^th December 2024 carried out a raid at a residence in Tulaele whereby three (3) individuals were charged including the accused. The accused was found at the back of the house near the laundry room where the police discovered a small box containing the accused’s driver’s license and loose marijuana leaves. The police continued their search to the accused bedroom and located a straw suspected to be used for unlawful means. A body search was also carried out on the accused whereby four (4) small zip-lock bags were discovered containing methamphetamine weighing at 0.97g and concealed in an eyeglass case, police uncovered a broken glass pipe, a utensil used for the smoking of methamphetamine.

The accused

4. The accused is a repeat offender and her four previous convictions were of possession of narcotics that of marijuana in which she has already served imprisonment terms except for her fourth conviction. On the fourth time she was given the opportunity to undergo psycho-educational programs monitored by the Alcohol and Drugs Court (ADC) to try and curb her involvement with narcotics to minimize the risk or re-offending. Unfortunately, the accused has re-offended. The present offending now includes methamphetamine.
5. The accused is now 56 years old and drifts from one place to another to live. At the time she was in ADC in 2022 she returned to her family at Aleipata and lived with her elderly mother and brother. The current offending shows that she no longer lives at Aleipata but at Tulaele.
6. The Pre-Sentence Report (PSR) dated 21^st March 2025 obtained from the accused has the accused conceding to the offending. The accused says in the PSR that she uses drugs. She takes full responsibility for her behaviour and offers no excuse for her offending.

Discussion

7. I reiterate what other learned judges have said about the need for deterrence. The Court will not tire in imposing custodial sentences upon those who keep re-offending and especially those who have been given the chance or the opportunity to undergo the ADC programs an alternative to being sent to prison straight away.
8. The aggravating features of the offending are:
   • Prevalence of narcotics offending;
   • The narcotics found of methamphetamine (0.97grams) and loose marijuana leaves (12.62grams);
   • A recidivist drug offender.
9. The total weight of methamphetamine found of less than 1 gram may seem small but this is deceptive. It has come to the courts knowledge in other narcotic cases that methamphetamine is cut (distributed) in minute amounts in small zip-lock plastic bags. There is also scientific research that methamphetamine is a destructive drug, highly addictive with profound mental and physical side effects.^[4] The total weight of marijuana leaves of 12.62grams is also not of small quantity if one takes into account the size and weight of a marijuana leaf, the quantity of marijuana leaves must be in abundance to weight this amount.
10. There is no doubt that the sentence to be imposed is custodial. The only mitigating factor is the accused early guilty plea. Despite serving multiple custodial sentences and the opportunity to go through the ADC, it has not turned the accused away from re-offending involving narcotic substances. Her narcotic offending has now escalated to include ice.
11. Prosecution asks the Court to take the totality approach, with the offence of possession of methamphetamine as the leading offence with the starting point of 2 years.
12. Although, I am mindful that sentence must not be increased merely because an offender has other similar convictions, with the result that he is thereby sentenced twice for the same offence.^[5] It is necessary to take them into consideration because a prisoner’s previous convictions may indicate a predilection to commit the particular type of offence of which he is convicted, in which case it is the duty of the Court for the protection of the public, to take them into consideration and lengthen the period of confinement accordingly. There is a predilection with the present defendant who have again re-offended for the fifth (5^th) time with narcotic offending.^[6] I find appropriate the starting point of 30 months.
13. As mentioned earlier the only mitigating factor I find in favour of the accused is her early guilty plea to which I give 25% amounting to 8 months leaving 22 months. I sentenced the accused as follows:

Possession of methamphetamine and possession of utensil:

• Possession of methamphetamine – 1 year and 10 months’ imprisonment.
• Possession of one (1) broken glass pipe and straw - 3 months’ imprisonment.

Possession of marijuana loose leaves:

• For possession of marijuana loose leaves weighted in total 12.62 grams – 14 months’ imprisonment

14. The sentences are to be served concurrently; less time in custody.
    

JUSTICE TUATAGALOA

^[1] Narcotics Act 1967, s.18(a)(a).
^[2] ibid., s.18(a)(b).
^[3] Ibid., s.13(b).
^[4] R v Fatu [2005] NZCA 278; [2006] 2 NZLR 72.
^[5] R v Power [1973] 2 NZLR 617 (CA)).
^[6] Her drug offending by which she underwent ADC is not noted on her previous conviction record.