HKSAR v. Lo Wai Leuk

DCCC 487/2018

[2019] HKDC 207

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 487 OF 2018

-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------

----------------------------

Reasons for Sentence

----------------------------

Charges and facts

1.D pleads guilty to a charge of burglary (Charge 1) and a charge of theft (Charge 3). 

2.D was seen committing both offences by a passerby, who reported it to the police.  The police soon arrived and arrested D.  The stolen property in each offence was recovered forthwith. 

3.Charge 1 relates to the burglary of a storeroom.  Two storerooms (“Storeroom 1” and “Storeroom 2”) were managed and used exclusively by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (“LCSD”) in Shing Mun River Promenade Garden No. 1, Tai Chung Kiu Road, Sha Tin, New Territories.  The garden was open 24 hours every day.  No fence or gate was installed.  The door of Storeroom 1 was secured by a padlock whereas that of Storeroom 2 was secured by a door knob lock.  Security guards were on duty from 9:00 am to 11:00 pm every day.   

4.At around 1:30 am on 11 April 2018, a passerby Mr. HA saw D lingering outside the storerooms.  At around 1:45 am D tampered with the padlock of Storeroom 1 for around 5 minutes.  D then entered Storeroom 1 and went out after a while.  It transpired that he had stolen some property from the storeroom.  These facts relate to Charge 1. 

5.Mr. HA then saw D commit the theft under Charge 3.  At around 2:15 am, he saw D walking along an unnamed road which was about 40 metres from the storerooms.  D shone a torch on every vehicle parked on the road.  Mr. HA called the police.  There was the sound of glass breaking.  D reached his hand into the interior of a van through the broken window of the sliding door on the passenger side.  Some property was stolen from the van.  These facts relate to Charge 3.     

6.At around 2:29 am, in response to Mr. HA’s report, the police arrived and intercepted D in the bush nearby.  D had a screwdriver in his trouser pocket.   In the bush were found two caps, one bottle of tea, one recycling bag, one bottle of deodorant, 5 packs of battery, 6 screwdrivers, one saw, 4 pairs of pliers, one torch, two cutters, two spanners, one toolbox, one voltage tester pen, one hammer, 11 screw adapters, 11 screwdriver heads, one roll of adhesive tape, one measuring tape, one blade, one plastic bag, 16 nails, 14 screws, and 8 hex keys, confirmed by the staff to originate from Storeroom 1.  Those were the stolen items under Charge 1.

7.An electric drill valued at $1,100 and a demolition hammer valued at $600, which had just been stolen from the van, were found on the ground near the van.  Those were the stolen items under Charge 3.

8.The repair to the window cost about $800.    

9.In subsequent enquiries, D admitted both offences.  He broke the padlock and entered Storeroom 1 to steal.  He broke the window of the van as he saw some tools inside the van.  He put down the stolen tools on the ground near the van when he saw the police running towards him. 

Mitigation

10.D is 46 years of age.  He was a repair technician before arrest.  He lived with his parents. His income was $15,000.  He contributed $3,000 to the household expenditure. He suffered from hypertension, high cholesterol, and diabetes. 

11.Relevant to the present sentence are his 7 records for theft (dates of sentence between September 1987 and April 2015) and one record for “theft-related”[1] burglary (sentenced to 21 months in June 2016).   

12.His counsel Mr. Woon asks me to consider wholly, or at least partly, concurrent sentences as the offences took place between 1:30 am and 2:15 am in close vicinity. 

Sentencing considerations

13.In R v Wong Man [1993] 1 HKC 80, Macdougall JA in the Court of Appeal stated that the proper starting point for burglary of non-domestic premises would be 2 years 6 months’ imprisonment for a first offender of full age. 

14.There is no sentencing tariff for theft from vehicle. 

15.D is a repeat offender for theft.  A more deterrent sentence is called for. 

Sentencing D

16.On Charge 1, I take a starting point of 2 years 6 months.  I give him a one-third discount for his plea of guilty.  As the property was all recovered, I further reduce the sentence by a month.  The sentence is 19 months. 

17.On Charge 3, I take a basic starting point of 15 months.  I increase it by 3 months for more deterrence due to his repeat offending for theft.  From an actual starting point of 18 months, I give him a one-third discount for his plea of guilty.  As the property was all recovered, I further reduce the sentence by a month.  The sentence is 11 months. 

18.I order the sentences to be partly concurrent, so that only 3 months of Charge 3 shall be consecutive to Charge 1.  The overall sentence is 22 months.