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

Police v Tasele [2022] WSSC 61 (1 November 2022)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Tasele & Anor [2022] WSSC 61 (01 November 2022)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Informant

AND:

MELENIUMA TOLEAFOA TASELE aka MELEGI FALANIKO aka MELENIUMAF FALANIKO aka MELENIUMAFOU FALANIKO ALENI SALIO aka MELENIUMAFOU male of Leauvaauta, Fasitoouta and Leone.

First Defendant

AND:

PAULO JUNIOR SOFENI aka PJ SOFENI male of Vaiala and Leone

Second Defendant

Counsel: T. Sasagi & E. Lam for Prosecution
Defendants in person

Sentence: 1 November 2022

SENTENCE OF ROMA J

Charges

1. You are being sentenced this afternoon on multiple charges of burglary and theft. For Meleniuma there are 8 charges of burglary (3 being joint charges); and 7 charges of theft (3 being joint charges). For Paulo there are 3 joint charges of burglary and 3 joint charges of theft.
2. The maximum penalty for burglary is 10 years’ imprisonment and for theft, up to 7 years depending on the value of the items stolen. You had admitted some charges and denied others but on the 7^th September 2022, you sought to vacate your denials and substituted guilty pleas.

Offending

3. The offending occurred on eight separate occasions over a period of 2 months from March to April 2022. The first incident occurred on the 6^th March at Saleufi and involved Meleniuma only. The victim is a 51 year old female of Saleufi. She and her husband left their home for a family gathering at Sinamoga. Meleniuma entered the house without any authority and stole items of clothing with a total value of $939.00.
4. The second incident occurred on the 15^th March at Maagao. It involved the both of you. The victim is a 26 year old female. She was at work and left her house unoccupied when you both approached the house, entered from the back without any authority and stole a HP laptop and a Samsung tablet with a total value of $5,700.00.
5. The third incident occurred around 3am on the 21^st March at Faatoia and concerned Meleniuma only. The victim is a 59 year old male of Faatoia. Meleniuma approached the home while the family were sleeping. He entered through the front door without any authority, he stole an IPhone that was charged on a coffee table and took chocolate and alcohol from the fridge. He also took the car keys from the victim’s wife’s bag and used it to open the vehicle outside from where he took a driver’s licence. The total value of stolen items was $2,029.00.
6. The fourth incident occurred on the 10^th April at Faatoia. It also involved Meleniuma only. He went back to the same house whilst the family were sleeping and stole an Alcatel cellphone and cash of $308.00, the total value being $509.00.
7. The fifth incident occurred on the 13^th April also at Faatoia. It involved Meleniuma only. The complainant is a police officer. In the early hours of the morning whilst the complainant’s family were asleep, Meleniuma used a pair of scissors to cut the screens with intent to enter the house. He was distracted by dogs barking and left without any success.
8. The sixth incident occurred on the 6^th April at Levili and involved Meleniuma only. The complainant is a 40 year old male. Meleniuma broke into the complainant’s house whilst the family were asleep and took a Samsung cellphone, a JBL bluetooth speaker and $650.00 cash. The total value of the items being $2,150.00.
9. The seventh incident occurred on the 20^th April at Maagao. It involved both of you. The victim is a 58 year old female. Like previous victims, she and her family were asleep at about 3am when you entered the house without any authority. You stole a laptop and cellphone and several other items, the total value being $3,542.00. The items were subsequently recovered.
10. The eighth and last incident occurred on the 24^th April at Maagao and involved the both of you. The victim is a 48 year old female. She had been with her family at Vaivase leaving her house unoccupied when you broke in around 3am and stole a number of goods and items, a suitcase and radio speaker with a total value of $608.00. Some of the items were recovered by police. On the 25^th April after police investigation you were both apprehended. The pre-sentence report refers to some of the offending and in all you blame alcohol as a factor.

Victims

11. There are multiple victims of your offending all within close proximity to each other. I have just 2 victim impact reports for 2 victims submitted through the Attorney General’s office. The reports confirm that some of the items were recovered. But they also say that no apology has ever been rendered.

Aggravating Factors

12. The aggravating features of the offending are:
    • (i) these were multiple offending - there were 8 separate incidents involving Meleniuma and 3 involving Paulo;
    • (ii) three incidents were joint offending involving you both;
    • (iii) the offending involved invasion of the privacy of the victims’ homes;
    • (iv) the offending continued for over 2 months and very likely for a longer period had you not been apprehended by police;
    • (v) the offending involved and impacted multiple victims;
    • (vi) there was a degree of premeditation;
    • (vii) the offending involved a significant value of stolen items - for Meleniuma the total value of the stolen items is $15,477.00 and for Paulo $9,850.00;
    • (viii) the impact on the victims - the offending involved a breach of the sanctity of their homes and loss of their properties;
    • (ix) there is a prevalence of these types of offending.
13. Personal to you as offenders, an aggravating factor is your previous similar convictions. For Meleniuma your latest according to police records was in 2015. But the pre sentence report also refers to convictions in the District Court in 2021 for offences involving violence. For Paulo according to police record, you have one in 2019 for an unrelated offending. But the Probation Service in its report refers to a conviction for burglary in September 2021 for which you were sentenced to 12 months’ supervision and ordered to complete 80 hours’ community service. I have checked the Court’s record and it confirms what the Probation Service say. You also have according to Probation a conviction for a violence related offending in the Family Violence Court in November 2021. Looking at the dates of your present offending, they were committed whilst you were under a sentence of supervision. These matters are highly relevant.

Mitigating Factors

14. In relation to the offending there are none. But personal to you as offenders I take into account your guilty pleas and your personal circumstances. For Meleniuma, you are 22 years of age. You have a partner and 2 young children. You were living with your partner’s family at Leone and employed at the time of the offences.
15. For Paulo you are 20 years of age, you ended your formal education at Apia Primary school because of financial issues. Your father has passed away and you have been dependent on your mother for support. The record shows that you had gone through the Alcohol and Drugs Court’s programme for a previous offending in 2019. But it is also clear that you continue to reoffend with alcohol being a factor. You have both expressed remorse. I do not accept such as genuine. You have both been in custody since the 27^th April 2022 according to the record.

Discussion

16. There continues to be an increase in cases of young men like you going on a drinking spree and breaking into private homes and stealing to buy more alcohol. There is also a prevalence of reoffending despite deterrent sentences imposed by the Court. Looking at your history, Meleniuma has gone on to become a recidivist and spree burglar. Paulo is well on his way to becoming one. But the Court must continue to impose sentences of denunciation and deterrence in cases similar to yours to protect members of the public and their properties.
17. Prosecution recommends a starting point of 5 years for Meleniuma and 4 years for Paulo. I have reviewed the authorities cited by prosecution. I adopt the totality principle and accept 5 years as the appropriate starting point on the lead charge of burglary against Meleniuma also taking into account your previous history of similar offending. From that 5 years I deduct the following - 5 months for your personal circumstances including the impact on your young family; and 1 month for the length a period that you had been in custody, being just over 6 months from the 27^th April awaiting a consolidation of all matters against you and sentencing. After those deductions, a term of 4 years and 6 months remains. I make a final deduction of 18 months for your guilty pleas. The end sentence is 3 years.
18. For Paulo I adopt 4 years as recommended by prosecution on the lead charge of burglary again taking into account your previous similar offending history. I make the following deductions - 5 months for your personal circumstances; and 1 month for the lengthy period of just over 6 months that you had been held in custody awaiting the final determination of these matters. The remainder is 3 years and 6 months. I make a final deduction of 18 months for your guilty pleas leaving an end sentence of 2 years.

Result

19. For Meleniuma I sentence you as follows:
    • (i) on the 8 charges of burglary, you are convicted of each charge and sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment;
    • (ii) on the 4 charges of theft committed on 15/03/22, 21/03/22, 16/04/22 and 20/4/22, you are convicted of each charge and sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment;
    • (iii) on the 3 charges of theft committed on 06/03/22, 10/04/22 and 24/04/22, you are convicted of each charge and sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment;
    • (iv) all sentences are to be served concurrently less time you have spent in custody.
20. For Paulo I sentence you as follows:
    • (i) on the 3 charges of burglary you are convicted of each charge and sentenced to 2 years’ imprisonment;
    • (ii) on the 3 charges of theft you are convicted of each charge and sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment;
    • (iii) all sentences are to be served concurrently less time you have spent in custody.

JUSTICE ROMA