HKSAR v. Yip Ngok Chin

DCCC 959/2023

[2025] HKDC 95

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 959 OF 2023

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Robbery". He robbed $9,330 of a convenience store attached to a petrol station in an afternoon using a foot-long knife.

Summary of Facts

2.The offence took place at a Tigermart convenience store ("the Store")  attached to an Esso petrol station situated at No.99 Castle Peak Road, Kwai Chung ("the Esso Station").

3.About 5:00 p.m. on 22 June 2022, Madam Szeto (PW1)  was on duty as the cashier of the Store.  The defendant entered the Store, pointed a knife (about 30 cm in length and 5 cm in width)  at PW1 and declared "robbery" in Punti.  He walked to the cashier counter and demanded PW1 to open the drawer.  PW1 was in great fear.  She told the defendant that the drawer was not locked.  He then opened the drawer, took the cash, put the money in his backpack and left the Store.

4.PW1 saw the defendant climbing over the fence and getting into a white 7-seater vehicle.  PW1 later found a total sum of $9,330 in cash missing (i.e. stolen by the defendant).

5.At the time of the robbery, Mr. Chan (PW2), manager of the Store, was in his office and heard a male voice saying "robbery".  He came out of his office and saw the defendant pointing a knife at PW1.  PW2 witnessed the robbery and saw the defendant boarding a 7-seater vehicle MT9555.  He reported the incident and the plate number to the Police.

6.Mr. Lau (PW3), an attendant of the Esso Station, also heard the defendant shouting "robbery".  He witnessed the robbery as well.  PW3 also saw the defendant climbing over the fence and getting into a car MT9555 ("the Car")  parked nearby.  He told the police officers who attended the scene shortly afterwards what he saw.

Arrest

7.About 5:57 p.m. on the same day, the Police intercepted the Car at Castle Peak Road in Kwai Chung. The defendant, who was the driver of the Car, was arrested for "Robbery".  He remained silent under caution.

8.Upon search, the Police found a black waist bag in the storage compartment between the driver's seat and the front passenger seat of the Car.  It contained :-

in the main compartment:

(i)  $2,240 cash in various denominations;

(ii)  27 x $10 notes clipped by a small blue double clip;

(iii)  20 x $50 notes clipped by a small silver clip;

(iv)  50 x $100 notes clipped by a round silver clip;

(v)  25 x $20 notes clipped by a big blue double clip; and

in the hidden compartment:

(vi)  1 x $20 note and 2 x $10 notes.

In other words, a total of $9,050 cash was found.

9.When being shown the different piles of cash found in the waist bag seized from the Car, PW1 identified the banknotes being the money robbed by the defendant from the Store.

10.In the respective identification parades held on 27 June 2022, PW2 and PW3 identified the defendant as the robber.

11.The defendant was the registered owner of the Car.

12.CCTV footage of the Store captured the robbery.  CCTV footage of the Shell petrol station near the Esso Station captured the Car entering the Shell station, fuelling and leaving between 5:28 p.m. and  5:34 p.m. on 22 June 2022.

Mitigation & Sentence

13.The defendant is 38 and has 9 conviction records, which included 4 "A.O.A.B.H." offences, and 3 drug-related offences.  Defence counsel Ms. Lai informed me that the defendant is married with 4 daughters and 1 son (aged between 8 and 1).  He started working at the age of 18 and has been a driver most of the years.  At the time of the present offence, he was an Uber driver with little income owing to the pandemic.

14.In mitigation, Ms. Lai submitted that in June 2022, the defendant's wife (who was then pregnant with their 5^th child)  and their 4 children all contracted COVID in the same week with high fever.  The defendant had used up all his savings and was unable to provide them with the required medical care.  Under such circumstances, he made a foolish decision to commit robbery.

15.Treatment of COVID was carried out by the government during the 3 years of pandemic. Medical expenses, if any, should be minimal. In any event, the court has, time after time, expressed in very clear terms that being in financial difficulty (however serious)  or having sick family members is no mitigating factor for committing a crime. A clear message must be conveyed to the general public that robbery is a serious crime and that the offenders would be punished by long-term imprisonment.

16.According to the Court of Appeal's decision in Mo Kwong Sang v The Queen [1981] HKLR 610, the appropriate sentence in an ordinary case of armed robbery where the accused carried a knife or other dangerous weapon which he displayed to his victim, should be 5 years' imprisonment. I am aware that the defendant has no previous similar convictions and that his last conviction is dated 2010. I accept that he has reformed himself. On the other hand, the defendant robbed a convenience store, which by itself is an aggravating factor[1]. I cannot overlook the vulnerability of PW1 and the nature of a convenience store.

17.Having balanced all factors, I consider a starting point of 5 years and 3 months' imprisonment just and appropriate. With the timely guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 42 months. Prior to sentencing, the defendant has prepared a cheque in the sum of $280 drawn in favour of the owner of the Esso Station as full restitution of the cash stolen by him[2]. Prosecuting counsel Mr. Lo has confirmed receipt of the cheque by the owner. On this basis, I will grant the defendant an additional discount of 2 months. Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction. I sentence the defendant to 40 months' imprisonment.