HKSAR v. Huang Chiu-sing

CACC000173/1998

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

1998, No.173
(Criminal)

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

Coram: Mayo and Stuart-Moore, JJ.A.

Date of Hearing: 9 July 1998

Date of Judgment: 9 July 1998

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

J U D G M E N T

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

Stuart-Moore, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. On 3rd March 1998, this Applicant pleaded guilty in the District Court before Judge Christie to four charges of wounding with intent. The judge took a starting point of seven years' imprisonment and reduced this to 4 1/2 years on charge 2, which was the most serious, and imposed concurrent sentences of three years' imprisonment on the remaining charges.

2. The Applicant now seeks leave to appeal against his sentence. His application provided no reasons which explained his complaint but he has told us this morning that he feels that the sentence was too long because he pleaded guilty at the first opportunity and that followed his surrender to the police.

3. The Applicant, although he was still 19 years old, came before the District Court with a bad record behind him. This was comprised of an offence of robbery and two offences of wounding involving grievous bodily harm.

4. The judge, in passing sentence, described this case in the following terms:

"You were one of a group of young men who attacked another group of young people with knives and choppers at a shopping arcade one day last year. Four of those were wounded, so there are four charges of wounding with intent to which you have pleaded guilty.

The worst injuries were inflicted on the victim in the 2nd charge. He sustained lacerations to the abdomen and deep lacerations to both arms and the shoulder. Some bones were exposed and one arm was broken. Two other victims suffered less severe chop wounds. In the case concerning charge 4, lacerations only were inflicted on one part of the body.

These victims were not known to you or your group and the attack was made for no better reason than you felt offended by an incident which had occurred about one hour previously when there was an exchange of foul language.

There is no information in the facts presented as to who led this attack. You say, you did not, but you admit that you were armed with a knife."

5. The judge later went on to say that this was clearly a surprise attack which was made with the intention of inflicting knife wounds quickly so that the offenders could leave the scene as soon as possible.

6. The task of the judge was then to take into account those matters which were relevant to mitigation in determining the appropriate sentence. He had in mind the Applicant's age, his plea of guilty and he specifically said these words:

"I accept that this reflects your remorse since you did surrender to the police, after leaving Hong Kong and then returning, and you made a confession."

7. The sentence imposed was not a single day too long. The application is wholly without merit. The judge specifically referred to the matters raised by the Applicant today and took them into account.

8. We shall order that three months of the time spent in custody awaiting this application shall not count towards the Applicant's sentence.

Representation:

Mr. Francis Lo, S.A.D.P.P. (Ag.) for Respondent

Applicant in person.