Back to index

Conviction upon circumstantial evidence is proper if court is convinced that defendant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. American Samoa v. Sale, 2 A.S.R. 635.

Person accused of crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and in criminal prosecution state has burden of establishing all essential elements of crime and proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt. American Samoa v. Leinati, 2 A.S.R. 644.

Under rule of burden of proof, prosecution is compelled to establish every essential element of crime charged beyond reasonable doubt. American Samoa v. Asuemu, 2 A.S.R. 646.

Accessory before the fact is one who procures, commands, or counsels commission of felony by another but who is not present when felony is committed, and under Code such accessory is principal. CAS 805.) Government v. Tulei, 2 A.S.R. 656.

Conviction is not warranted where evidence is as consistent with innocence as it is with hypothesis of guilt. Government v. Nomura, 2 A.S.R. 658.

In order to sustain conviction on circumstantial evidence, all circumstances proved must be consistent with each other, consistent with hypothesis that accused is guilty and inconsistent with hypothesis that he is innocent. Government v. Nomura, 2 A.S.R. 658.

Burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal cases does not prohibit trier of fact from drawing inferences from the evidence. American Samoa Gov't v. Sale Uo, 4 A.S.R.2d 14.

§ 2 Liability

§2(1) Mens Rea (Intent)

Their testimony indicates that accused may have honestly believed that destroyed plants were one their own land, there can be no criminal intent or mens rea and no conviction since criminal intent is element of trespass. American Samoa v. Leinati, 2 A.S.R. 644.

Territorial forgery statute requires that defendant have created the false writing with intent to defraud, not that he have actually succeeded in defraudying anyone. A.S.C.A. § 46.4115. American Samoa Gov't v. Lefai, 6 A.S.R.2d 78.

Statute providing that assault in the first degree is committed when a person "attempts to kill or cause serious physical injury to another person" requires proof of specific intent. A.S.C.A. § 46.3520 (a)(2). Tauasosi v. American Samoa Gov't, 7 A.S.R.2d 5.

Where a statute requires that a person act intentionally, knowingly, or purposefully, or "attempt" to commit a crime, proof of specific intent is required. A.S.C.A. §§ 46.3503 (a)(1), 46.3503 (a)(2), 46.3520 (a)(1), 46.3520 (a)(2). Tauasosi v. American Samoa Gov't, 7 A.S.R.2d 5.

No proof of specific intent is required by statute providing that a person commits a crime if "under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, he recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death. A.S.C.A. §§ 46.3503 (a)(3), 46.3520 (a)(3). Tauasosi v. American Samoa Gov't, 7 A.S.R.2d 5.

A crime that requires proof of specific intent is not a lesser-included offense of a crime that does not require proof of specific intent and must be separately charged. Tauasosi v. American Samoa Gov't, 7 A.S.R.2d 5.

Because third-degree assault can be committed "recklessly" or even "with criminal negligence," a guilty plea does not establish what injuries, if any, were inflicted upon plaintiff, nor does it establish that defendant acted intentionally, an essential element of the tort of battery. A.S.C.A. § 46.3522(a)(1) & (4). Galea`i v. Atofau, 16 A.S.R.2d 76.

When a crime includes an intent element, a finding of guilt in the first part of a bifurcated trial also implicitly includes a finding that the defendant either had the requisite intent or would have had it but for the mental disease or defect. A.S.C.A. §§ 46.1301-46.1302. American Samoa Gov't v. Taylor, 19 A.S.R.2d 99.

Intent to injure or defraud a bank exists when the defendant acts knowingly and the natural result of this conduct would be to injure or defraud the bank, regardless of motive. It is not required that the bank suffer a loss or injury, since the intent of the law is to protect the bank's right to make its own decisions regarding the use of its funds. Furthermore, there exists an inherently fraudulent nature to bank loans made by officers for their own benefit. American Samoa Gov't v. Leiataua, 28 A.S.R.2d. 206.

For purposes of determining criminal culpability under a possession statute, a person need not own the illegal thing but may still have possession of it if the person knows of its presence and has physical control of it, or has the power and intention to control it. The court may reasonably infer that a defendant knew of the presence and had physical control of a gun where the gun was found in a residence that defendant lived in as evidence by his presence in and familiarity with the residence. American Samoa Gov’t v. Se`iuli, 29 A.S.R.2d 176.

§2(2) Actus Reus

Under the "objective territorial" principle of jurisdiction, criminal acts taking place outside a state are within its territorial jurisdiction if those acts produced proscribed effects within the state. American Samoa Gov't v. Lefai, 6 A.S.R.2d 78.

When conduct, taking place within a state, produces its effect in another state, the two states have concurrent jurisdiction over the transaction. American Samoa Gov't v. Lefai, 6 A.S.R.2d 78.

American Samoa court had territorial jurisdiction over criminal defendant who allegedly forged a letter and mailed it in American Samoa, despite the fact that the letter's recipient, and therefore its criminal "effect," was in another jurisdiction. American Samoa Gov't v. Lefai, 6 A.S.R.2d 78.

In providing prison warden with an unsigned document stating the terms of a prisoner's sentence, office of the attorney general was acting to ensure compliance by government officials with an order that had already been publicly announced in the presence of counsel for the government and was already binding on the government as well as on the defendant, and receipt of this document imposed a duty on the warden to inquire further of the court or the attorney general's office, at the very least, before releasing the defendant in direct violation of the notice he had been given. American Samoa Gov't v. Laumoli, 12 A.S.R.2d 111.

§2(3) Causation

"Proximate cause" within the meaning of homicide by vehicle statute is proven if the traffic regulation violated by the defendant was designed to prevent the sort of harm that actually occurred and the violation was a substantial factor in bringing about the accident. A.S.C.A. § 22.0706. American Samoa Gov't v. Sale Uo, 4 A.S.R.2d 14.

An accused cannot escape criminal liability for a vehicular homicide if intervening contributing conduct is foreseeable. American Samoa Gov't v. Mase, 26 A.S.R.2d 119.

Accountability is excused only if the intervening cause supersedes the defendant's original act. American Samoa Gov't v. Mase, 26 A.S.R.2d 119.

§ 3 Defenses

Provocation is not defense to assault, but may be considered as extenuation, and when considering provocation, question is what is impression made on mind of person committing assault. American Samoa v. Willis, 1 A.S.R. 635.

Serious allegations against defendant by victim which provoke assault do not constitute defense or excuse for assault. American Samoa v. Willis, 1 A.S.R. 635.

Evidence of accusations made against defendant and of actions of defendant demonstrating she was acting in rage at time she committed assault constitute provocation. American Samoa v. Willis, 1 A.S.R. 635.

Lower court’s acquittal of sixteen year old boy who went along with criminals because he feared bodily harm was correct. Government v. Tulei, 2 A.S.R. 656.

Ignorance or mistake of law is no excuse for its violation, and belief of defendant that chief could excuse him from searching for coconut beetle was not excuse for violating law by failing to search. Government v. Si’u, 3 A.S.R. 479.

It is no defense for accused that another person pled guilty to same crime and was not punished. Government v. Si’u, 3 A.S.R. 479.

Where defendant’s eyesight is defective, he is not required to comply with statute requiring that he search for coconut beetle and attaching penalty for failure to do so. Fe’a v. Government, 3 A.S.R. 496.

Defective eyesight is not defense to failure to assist in building village pig wall, such failure being misdemeanor, if defendant could have performed work and been of assistance. Fe’a v. Government, 3 A.S.R. 496.

Plea of statute of limitations may be raised under plea of not guilty. Government v. palafu, 3 A.S.R. 556.

That defendant's conduct was similar to pre-Christian Samoan ceremonial practices was no defense in prosecution for sexual abuse and sodomy, since territorial legislature enacted no statutory exception for such practices. A.S.C.A. §§ 46.3611, 3612. American Samoa Gov't v. Masaniai, 4 A.S.R.2d 156.

A finding of self-defense is a complete defense to a criminal charge of third-degree assault. A.S.C.A. §§ 46.3305 & 46.3522(a). Galea`i v. Atofau, 16 A.S.R.2d 76.

American Samoa's criminal law does not, except in a few extraordinary circumstances, allow consent as a justification for the infliction of serious injuries. A.S.C.A. § 46.3523. Galea`i v. Atofau, 16 A.S.R.2d 76.

A defense of diminished mental capacity consists of showing that a mental disease or defect, although not rendering the defendant "insane," nevertheless prevented him from having the requisite state of mind to be guilty of the charged crime. American Samoa Gov't v. Taylor, 19 A.S.R.2d 99.

A criminal defendant who puts his mental capacity at issue may be compelled to submit to an examination by the government's expert, who may testify about his observations and conclusions. A.S.C.A. § 46.1304. American Samoa Gov't v. Taylor, 19 A.S.R.2d 99.

Regarding a defense of diminished mental capacity, when a mental disease or defect is alleged to have resulted in a criminal defendant's "incapacity to intend" rather than in "insanity," the testimony of the government's expert must be limited to the question of such incapacity and may not be considered by the jury for any other purpose. American Samoa Gov't v. Taylor, 19 A.S.R.2d 99.

The testimony of the government's expert may, in some circumstances, include statements made to him by a criminal defendant during the compelled examination, although the witness may testify only about the alleged mental disease or defect and not about "guilt or innocence" (i.e., about whether the defendant would be guilty in the absence of any such disease or defect). A.S.C.A. § 46.1304. American Samoa Gov't v. Taylor, 19 A.S.R.2d 99.

§ 4 Specific Crimes

§4(1) Inchoate Offenses

Code makes it crime for persons to conspire to injure or oppress rights of another Samoan under law, and these rights include that of family member to occupy communal land. Leasiolagi v. Fao, 2 A.S.R. 451.

§4(2) Offenses Against the Person

Code makes it crime for matai or other chief to injure, oppress, or threaten Samoan to deprive him of any right under law, and such right includes right to occupy family lands. Leasiolagi v. Fao, 2 A.S.R. 451.

Assault with deadly weapon is infamous crime and disqualifies candidate from eligibility for matai title. Akeimo v. Mulu, 2 A.S.R. 89.

Mere threat to commit injury is not actionable wrong and does not constitute assault, which must be apparent attempt by violence to do corporal hurt to another. Fesagaiga v. Alo-Pepe, 3 A.S.R. 118.

Slanderous remarks and assault and battery by one party against another cannot be considered by courts in interpreting trust, but do constitute crimes and torts, and court may give warning to that effect to offending party. Tolivale v. Ufanua, 3 A.S.R. 196.

A finding of self-defense is a complete defense to a criminal charge of third-degree assault. A.S.C.A. §§ 46.3305 & 46.3522(a). Galea`i v. Atofau, 16 A.S.R.2d 76.

§4(3) Sexual Offenses

Charge of rape is improper where both parties consent to intercourse upon which charge was founded. American Samoa v. Teleti, 1 A.S.R. 342.

Where statute defines the crime of sexual abuse to include the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, such purpose can be inferred by the trier of fact from the defendant's conduct. American Samoa Gov't v. Masaniai, 4 A.S.R.2d 156.

Statute defining the crime of sodomy does not require proof that defendant committed the act with the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire. A.S.C.A. § 46.3611. American Samoa Gov't v. Masaniai, 4 A.S.R.2d 156.

Record adequately supported trial court's finding that defendant had made sexual contact with his daughter without her consent and for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire. American Samoa Gov't v. Masaniai, 6 A.S.R.2d 114.

§4(4) Prostitution

RESERVED

§4(5) Offenses Against the Family

RESERVED

§4(6) Abortion

RESERVED

§4(7) Robbery, Arson, Burglary and Related Offenses

RESERVED

§4(8) Stealing and Related Offenses

Petty larceny is a misdemeanor. Government v. Palafu, 3 A.S.R. 556.

Family member may be convicted for larceny for taking plantations or fruit from another family member’s plot on family lands. American Samoa v. Iose, 2 A.S.R. 638.

Under territorial statute, one who makes a contract within the territory to extend credit at the rate of 20 per cent commits the crime of usury and is liable to imprisonment and to forfeiture of the entire amount of the debt. A.S.C.A. § 28.1510. Shantilal Brothers Limited v. K.M.S.T. Wholesales, Inc., 9 A.S.R.2d 62.

Under the embezzlement statute, a "person commits the crime of embezzlement if he knowingly misappropriates property of another which has been entrusted to him or which has lawfully come under his control. A.S.C.A. § 46.4104(a). American Samoa Gov't v. Tauala, 25 A.S.R.2d 179.

A person commits the crime of stealing if he appropriates property of another with the purpose to deprive him of it by means of deceit" A.S.C.A. § 46.4103(a). American Samoa Gov't v. Tauala, 25 A.S.R.2d 179.

Normally, "value" is determined by the market value of the thing taken at the time and place of the crime. A.S.C.A. § 46.4102(a). However, when the thing taken is an instrument evidencing debt, that value is the amount due or collectible on it. A.S.C.A. § 46.4102(b)(1). American Samoa Gov't v. Tauala, 25 A.S.R.2d 179.

In a criminal case involving fraud on a bank, the government has the burden to show that the defendant acted with the intent to injure or defraud the bank. American Samoa Gov't v. Leiataua, 28 A.S.R.2d. 206.

Harm to a bank is established if there are special circumstances demonstrating injury or risk of injury to the bank despite the obligation of a financially responsible party to the bank. A.S.G. v. Leiataua, 31 A.S.R.2d 89.

§4(9) Weapons

RESERVED

§4(10) Gambling

Gambling and the keeping of gaming facilities is a criminal offense, though an exception exists for occasional bingo games whose profits are used for charitable, religious, or educational purposes. A.S.C.A. § 46.4301-46.4302. Le Vaomatua v. American Samoa Gov't, 23 A.S.R.2d 11.

Money lending is not within the ambit of the gaming statute's proviso exempting gaming for religious, educational, or charitable purpose. A.S.C.A. §§ 46.4301-02. United Congregational Christian Church of the South Bay in Samoa v. McMoore, 28 A.S.R.2d 195.

§4(11) Pornography and Related Offenses

RESERVED

§4(12) Offenses Against Public Order

RESERVED

§4(13) Offenses Against the Administration of Justice

Criminal trial is not a private matter between victim and defendant or his family, and anyone who enters an agreement with the purpose of rendering court unable to proceed by making evidence unavailable may be held in contempt of court. American Samoa Gov't v. Godinet, 7 A.S.R.2d 127.

Criminal contempt statute authorizing the executive to prosecute certain conduct as criminal contempt of court does not limit court's power to act on its own under general contempt statute. A.S.C.A. §§ 3.0203, 46.4617. American Samoa Gov't v. Godinet, 7 A.S.R.2d 127.

General contempt statute may give rise to criminal liability despite existence of separate statute making certain acts criminal offenses. A.S.C.A. §§ 3.0203, 46.4617. American Samoa Gov't v. Godinet, 7 A.S.R.2d 127.

Agreement between prospective witness in criminal proceeding and members of the defendant's family that defendant would leave the territory and victim would refuse to testify constituted resistance to process of court within meaning of contempt statute, even if "process" is construed narrowly to refer to a subpoena and even though the agreement was made prior to the issuance of a subpoena to the witness, since the agreement could not reasonably be construed to mean that the witness would refuse to testify only if she received no subpoena. A.S.C.A. § 3.0203. American Samoa Gov't v. Godinet, 7 A.S.R.2d 127.

Agreement between prospective witness and members of criminal defendant's family that defendant would leave the territory and witness would refuse to testify, made after court's order that defendant stand trial and with the purpose of preventing the trial, constituted resistance to the court's mandate within the meaning of contempt statute. A.S.C.A. § 3.0203. American Samoa Gov't v. Godinet, 7 A.S.R.2d 127.

Where evidence at hearing on order to show cause showed that former warden and other prison officials had wilfully violated court order, but that incumbent warden to whom order to show cause was directed had taken no part in releasing prisoner in violation of court order, the incumbent warden would not be held in contempt of court. American Samoa Gov't v. Etuale (Mem.), 11 A.S.R.2d 154.

Where court had allowed defendant a limited "work release" during a term of detention as a condition of probation, and defendant had wilfully violated the terms of the work release by spending time at home and engaging in social activities during times when he was released solely for purposes of employment, the work release would be revoked and the defendant held in contempt of court. American Samoa Gov't v. Ga`opo`a, 12 A.S.R.2d 108.

Warden's contention that judgment and sentence prohibiting release of prisoner was not binding on him because the copy he initially received did not bear the signatures of the judges was without merit, where sentence had been previously been announced from the bench and where a signed copy of the written order had been served on the government prior to the time the warden willfully disregarded the order. American Samoa Gov't v. Laumoli, 12 A.S.R.2d 111.

Persons continuing to occupy and cultivate land adjudicated as belonging to another family are subject to sanctions for contempt. Lualemaga v. Asifoa, 23 A.S.R.2d 17.

§4(14) Offenses Affecting Government

RESERVED

§4(15) Traffic Offenses

Code of American Samoa specifies speed limits for various road conditions. Tigi v. Government, 4 A.S.R. 894.

Where policeman testifies as to speed of defendant following his automobile and ascertains speed from his speedometer, this would be accurate evidence. Tigi v. Government, 4 A.S.R. 894.

Where defendant admits that he was traveling at a certain speed which he thought lawful but was in fact not lawful, this admission corroborates testimony of witnessing policeman. Tigi v. Government, 4 A.S.R. 894.

Corroboration of testimony of prosecution’s witness in traffic case is not required. Tigi v. Government, 4 A.S.R. 902.

Same transaction may constitute both careless driving and speeding, subjecting defendant to conviction for each offense. Tigi v. Government, 4 A.S.R. 902.

Police officer's uncontroverted testimony that speed limit sign had been posted because the road was near a school did not bind the court to find that the posted limit applied only during school hours. American Samoa Gov't v. Sale Uo, 4 A.S.R.2d 14.

Court could conclude beyond any doubt that defendant who received speeding ticket was the same defendant whose license had previously been suspended after conviction for driving under the influence, although the speeding defendant had signed a different first name to the ticket, where (1) the last names were identical; (2) the signature on the ticket appeared to have been written in the same distinctive handwriting as the signature on the earlier ticket for driving under the influence; (3) the speeding defendant gave the same date of birth and village of residence as the driving under the influence defendant; (4) the speeding defendant did not present the arresting officer with a driver's license; (5) since the license of the driving under the influence defendant was still suspended at the time the speeding ticket was issued, he would not have had his license in his possession, and would have had motive and opportunity to misinform the officer of his identity. American Samoa Gov't v. Malae, 10 A.S.R.2d 99.

Under A.S.C.A. § 22.0708 the injury to any person resulting from the operation of a motor vehicle by a person under the influence of intoxicating liquor creates a felony offense. American Samoa Gov't v. Berry, 25 A.S.R.2d 149.

Under A.S.C.A. § 22.0607(a)(3), a driver having a blood-alcohol level of 0.08% or more is presumed to be "under the influence of intoxicating liquor." Toleafoa v. American Samoa Gov't, 26 A.S.R.2d 20.

Additional evidence regarding driving under the influence may also be presented at trial. A.S.C.A. § 22.0607(b). Toleafoa v. American Samoa Gov't, 26 A.S.R.2d 20.

Once a driver is found to have a blood-alcohol level of 0.08% or more, the statute presumes that he is under the influence and so is incapable of operating a vehicle safely. This statutory presumption reflects the proven medical fact that ingesting substantial quantities of alcohol impairs one's driving ability. Toleafoa v. American Samoa Gov't, 26 A.S.R.2d 20.

Appellant's contention that his not getting in an accident supports a finding that he was capable of safe driving, this is a "specious argument." The whole point of traffic laws is to prevent accidents, not just to punish drivers after an accident. Toleafoa v. American Samoa Gov't, 26 A.S.R.2d 20.

Only two elements constitute the offense of Driving under the Influence of Alcohol or Other Drugs: (1) the defendant was driving a motor vehicle, (2) while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs. Being a legal and not a medical term, "under the influence" means a person's intoxication has reached "a degree which renders him incapable of safely driving." A.S.C.A. § 22.0707(a). Toleafoa v. American Samoa Gov't, 26 A.S.R.2d 20.

The means of proving "under the influence" varies with each case and may include (1) observations of the defendant's manner of driving, his physical symptoms, and his performance of field sobriety tests; (2) his blood-alcohol level as shown in test results; and (3) admissible statements made by the defendant. Toleafoa v. American Samoa Gov't, 26 A.S.R.2d 20.

If evidence of past crimes speaks more to defendant's proclivity to commit crimes in general, rather than his participation in the crime at hand, it has a high probability of instigating the jury to convict because defendant "is a bad person" - an unallowable inference. American Samoa Gov't v. Bernard, 26 A.S.R.2d 110.

An accused cannot escape criminal liability for a vehicular homicide if intervening contributing conduct is foreseeable. American Samoa Gov't v. Mase, 26 A.S.R.2d 119.

The difference between "suspension" and "revocation" of a driver's license is insignificant for determining whether a defendant has committed a felony for driving while license is suspended in violation of A.S.C.A. § 22.0223. A.S.C.A. § 22.0223. American Samoa Gov't v. Bryce, 27 A.S.R.2d 1.

A.S.C.A. § 22.0803 does not apply to felonies. Under A.S.C.A. § 22.0708 the injury to any person resulting from the operation of a motor vehicle by a person under the influence of intoxicating liquor creates a felony offense. Officers may upon reasonable grounds, arrest persons found near the scene of a felony within a short time after its commission. See A.S.C.A. § 46.0805 (3). American Samoa Gov’t v. Berry, 29 A.S.R.2d 1.

§4(16) Drug Offenses

In American Samoa, "it is unlawful for a person to possess a controlled substance." A.S.C.A. § 13.1022(a). Marijuana is a controlled substance within the meaning of § 13.1022(a). A.S.G. v. Mapu, 31 A.S.R.2d 148.

Marijuana need not appear in its "recognizable" or "customary" form for an individual to be guilty of unlawful possession of marijuana. The Fono has explicitly included marijuana resin as a disallowed controlled substance and did not distinguish between typical and atypical forms if marijuana resin. A.S.G. v. Mapu, 31 A.S.R.2d 148.

§4(17) Miscellaneous Offenses

Where person tells three witnesses to tell false story in court to support conviction of accused for rape, he is guilty of subornation of perjury. American Samoa v. Salanoa, 1 A.S.R. 487.

Pig running at large would not necessarily be criminal nuisance unless feces of pig were allowed to collect on land in such quantities as to constitute unsanitary nuisance. (CAS 429.) Government v. Nomura, 2 A.S.R. 658.

False statement must be material to issue or question under consideration in order to constitute perjury, and false statement with respect to who types letter does not constitute perjury. Scanlan v. Steffany, 3 A.S.R. 583.

Misleading questions and questions containing more than one proposition to which different answers might be applied will not support conviction for perjury based on their answers. Scanlan v. Steffany, 3 A.S.R. 583.

Evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of unauthorized practice of law where it was established that appellant filed a memorandum in a criminal case containing legal argument offered on behalf of the defendant. A.S.C.A. § 31.0104. Pene v. American Samoa Gov't, 12 A.S.R.2d 43.

Back to index