The State v Andre Mohammed

• Jurisdiction: Trinidad & Tobago
• Court: High Court (Trinidad and Tobago)
• Judge: Ramsumair-Hinds, J.
• Judgment Date: 21 May 2025
• Neutral Citation: TT 2025 HC 147
• Year: 2025
• Docket Number: Suit No.: CR-HC-SDO-2024-263-1

The State

and

Andre Mohammed

Ramsumair-Hinds, J.

Suit No.: CR-HC-SDO-2024-263-1

High Court

Appearances:

Ms. C. Samuel and Mr. R. Bassant for the State.

Mr. R. Rajcoomar SC and Mr. N. Belmosa for the Prisoner.

SENTENCE RULING

JUDGE'S SENTENCING NOTES FOR EX-TEMPORE RULING

Ramsumair-Hinds, J.

1 By an Indictment filed on 22 July 2024, the Prisoner, Mr. Andre Mohammed was charged with the offence of Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle, contrary to section 4A(1)(d) of the Larceny Act, Chapter 11:12. That section provides that upon conviction on indictment, the Prisoner is liable to imprisonment for 15 years. The Indictment alleges that Mr. Andre Mohammed, on 3 February 2024, at the Sir Solomon Hochoy Highway, in the South Magisterial District, had in his possession a motor vehicle with chassis number TSMYE2158GM193552, the property of Ann Marie Millington, knowing the same to have been stolen.

2 The Sufficiency Hearing was concluded on 30 October 2024, and the Prisoner was committed to stand trial. On 13 May 2025, he was arraigned and pleaded guilty to the offence as charged. The facts were read and admitted by the Prisoner. Subsequently, the allocutus was put to the Prisoner and an opportunity allowed for a plea in mitigation by Defence Counsel, which was filed this morning and which I have duly considered.

3 The Prisoner now falls to be sentenced.

4 I bore in mind the sentencing methodology, aims and objectives as established in Benjamin v. R (1964) 7 W.I.R. 459, Aguillera, Ballai, Ballai and Ayow v. The State Cr App Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8 of 2015 and Jude John Arjoon v. The State Cr. App. No. S-022, 23, 24 of 2018 to which all sentencing Judges must adhere.

5 Regarding sentencing for this specific offence, I found precious little. Defence Counsel referred me to some precedents for larceny of a motor vehicle, but I am mindful that there is a difference between both actus reus and mens rea for that offence and the one on this Indictment. Nevertheless, I did derive some assistance from cases which dealt with receiving stolen property, which offence is contrary to the same section 4(1)(d) of the Larceny Act.

• a. In Winston Phillips Jr. v. The State Cr. App. No. 23 of 2006, the Court of Appeal affirmed a final sentence of five years imprisonment for receiving a Hilux motor vehicle knowing same to have been stolen. Hamel-Smith, J.A. noted that, “As regards the sentence imposed, we find the term of imprisonment to be reasonable in the circumstances, given that the appellant had no previous convictions. Car stealing is far too prevalent in this society today, and it abounds because there are persons only too willing to take them off the felon's hands for a small price. It is an offence that cannot be tolerated, and given that the maximum sentence for receiving is ten years, the appellant is fortunate that the judge imposed the sentence he did. The sentence will stand.”

• b. In The State v. Dale Ramcharan H.C. No. 53/2006, the Prisoner (a police constable) was found guilty of the offence of receiving a green Mitsubishi Galant motor vehicle and was sentenced to serve a final term of two years imprisonment at hard labour and to pay compensation to the victim in the sum of $17 500.00. Moosai, J. (as His Lordship then was) noted, “Ordinarily a conviction on indictment for receiving a motor vehicle knowing same to have been stolen ought to attract a custodial sentence … It is clear that the legislature has seen it fit to impose identical sentences for the offences of larceny and receiving a motor vehicle. However, the legislature also distinguishes between convictions on indictment and summary convictions, the former attracting a maximum of 15 years, the latter 10 years.”

6 As it relates to this case, the aggravating factors relative to the offence were:

• a. The prevalence of motor vehicle theft;

• b. The nature and seriousness of the offence;

• c. The...