The State v Aiton Ipai

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Lenalia AJ
• Judgment Date: 26 September 1997
• Citation: (1997) N1629
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1997
• Judgement Number: N1629

National Court: Lenalia AJ

Judgment Delivered: 26 September 1997

N1629

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR 600/97

THE STATE

V

AITON IPAI

Wabag

Lenalia AJ

18-22 September 1997

26 September 1997

CRIMINAL LAW — Break, Enter and Stealing — Plea — Sentence — Criminal Code S. 395 — Ch. No. 262.

CRIMINAL LAW — Sentencing — Taking other offences into account — Principles applicable — May lead to increase in sentence — Sentence must not exceed maximum sentence that may be passed in respect of the offence for which he has been convicted; The Acting Public Prosecutor v Andrew Amona Yongga [1981] PNGLR 314 adopted

Cases Cited

Acting Public Prosecutor v Andrew Amona Yongga [1981] PNGLR 314

Acting Public Prosecutor v Joe Kovea Mailai [1981] PNGLR 258

Counsel

P. Kumo, for the State

B. Aipe, for the Accused

26 September 1997

LENALIA AJ: The accused was convicted on his plea at Wabag on 18th September 1997 on a charge of break, enter and stealing items valuing at K14,250.00 at Panakada Repeater Station.

The owner of the property is alleged by the State to be Post and Telikom Pty Ltd. The offence committed is contrary to S. 395 of the Criminal Code.

After having read through the committal depositions I was satisfied that the facts confirm the accused plea, I then formally confirmed the accused's plea by announcing this fact to the accused and the two counsels. Prior to inviting the accused in allocutus to have his final say, the Counsel for the accused made an application in terms of S. 603 (1) (a) (b) (c) and (2) of the Criminal Code which provides that where an accused has been convicted upon indictment of an offence not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and where the Court is satisfied upon any of the circumstance defined under S. 603 (1) (a) (b) and (c) and with the consent of the State Prosecutor, the Court may ask the convicted person if he admits his guilt in respect of any or all the offences specified in the list and if he wishes them to be taken into account in passing sentence on him. Mr Kumo for the State submitted briefly that he consented to the two outstanding stealing charges be taken into account upon sentencing the accused.

There are not that many authorities in support of this procedural aspect at least not to my knowledge at the present time but the leading case authority in this jurisdiction is Acting Public Prosecutor v Andrew Amona...