IN SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Kalepo [2025] WSSC 74 (3 July 2025)

Case name: 	Police v Anthony KALEPO	
		
Citation: 	[2025] WSSC 74	
		
Decision date: 	03 July 2025	
		
Parties: 	POLICE (informant) and ANTHONY KALEPO male of Manono and Palisi (defendant)	
		
Hearing date(s): 		
		
File number(s): 		
		
Jurisdiction: 	Supreme Court, CRIMINAL	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Justice Tuatagaloa	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	The defendant is convicted and discharged.

		
Representation: 	Attorney General’s Office for Prosecution
Q. Sauaga for the Defendant

Catchwords: 	Non-custodial, possession of loose marijuana leaves, pleaded guilty, convicted and discharged	
		
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

Informant

A N D:

ANTHONY KALEPO, male of Manono & Palisi

Defendant

Counsel:	Attorney General’s Office for Prosecution
Q. Sauaga for the Defendant

Date:		03 July 2025

ORAL sentencE of Tuatagaloa J
1. 	The defendant appears for sentence on one (1) count of possession of loose marijuana leaves with a total weight of 1.43 grams.
2. 	The Summary of facts by the Prosecution says that a vehicle the defendant was travelling in was searched by the Police and the marijuana substances were found on the defendant.
3. 	The defendant pleaded guilty and is a first offender.
4. 	Counsel for the defendant submits for non – custodial sentence referring to other sentencing decisions of the Court of similar nature and amount of marijuana found on a person. 
5. 	Defence Counsel brought to the Court’s attention that the defendant was in custody for three (3) months on charges that were later withdrawn by the Police. Defence Counsel on that basis submits that should the Court impose a custodial sentence that the defendant be sentenced to time served. 
6. 	The Prosecution in line with the Court’s previous decisions submits for a non – custodial sentence of 12 months’ supervision and 100 hours’ community service. 
7. 	I agree that the appropriate sentence to impose is non – custodial. Given that the defendant was in custody for three (3) months on charges that were later withdrawn by the Police. The defendant is convicted and discharged.

JUSTICE LEUTELE MATA TUATAGALOA