for the daylight Island Hi Coffee shop robbery.

Woods had nothing to say yesterday before Chief Justice Austin Ward sentenced him for the August 31 heist which took place just three blocks from Hamilton Police Station.

While Mr. Justice Ward said he took into account Woods' circumstances he said: "My own view is that you must do more to help yourself with your addictions.'' Addicted to heroin, Woods was living in a chicken coop in King's Court, Curving Avenue, Pembroke at the time of the robbery.

When Police searched the wood framed coop in which Woods slept, his clothes were soaked through from a leaky metal roof.

He had been released from prison on parole on August 2 -- just 29 days before the robbery.

Woods pleaded guilty earlier this month to the aggravated robbery, in which he got away with $315 in cash. The offence carries a maximum sentence of 14 years.

The court heard that Woods was seen on Parliament Street acting suspiciously on the afternoon of the robbery. There were also reports he was seen with the machete handle sticking out of his pants.

Principal Crown Counsel Dorian Taylor said that he was even seen with a black scarf covering the lower half of his face near the store.

Woods entered Island Hi around 3.20 p.m. with the machete raised, saying: "I'm taking money!'' Fearing for his safety, the store owner stepped back and Woods rifled through the cash register, shoving money into his left pocket.

Woods ran from the store and was followed by the manager who was joined by an off duty Policeman.

Although he managed to make an escape Police caught up with him several days later on September 5 after they searched a Curving Avenue home.

Woods talked of his confused state of mind in the hours before the robbery, when he wrestled with committing the crime and tortured by his addiction.

Lawyer Elizabeth Christopher argued that Woods was "so incredibly remorseful and self-implicating'' that he deserved a prison sentence "in the range of four years''.

Armed robber given jail term Concerning the machete, Ms Christopher explained: "And I would suggest to you that the machete was not for aggressive purposes.'' But Mr. Justice Ward interjected: "It wasn't taken for decorative purposes -- as an article of clothing, was it?'' Ms Christopher concluded: "While he takes issue with whether he brandished the machete above his head and where the cash register was, we say its a matter of degree.

"We know the sentence would be substantial but my client intends to use the time wisely.''