Read the full judgment text of CAAR 000004/1993 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 5 October 1993 before Yang CJ, Bokhary JA, Bewley J.
Criminal law – sentencing – robbery – rape – attempted robbery – manifest inadequacy – wrong in principle – concurrent vs consecutive sentences – one transaction rule – previous good character – special leniency – Court of Appeal review – Attorney General's application – starting points – totality principle – mitigation – victim identification – use of knife – forced withdrawal from bank – rape in victim's flat – separate offences on different days – consecutive sentences totalling 8 years – starting point 5 years for robbery and attempted robbery – starting point 6 years for rape – reduction for guilty plea and mitigation – R v. Billam – AG v. Ip Chung-hang – Mo Kwong-sang v. R – R v. Lam Chun-po – concurrent sentences substituted for consecutive ones – sentence increased from concurrent 4 years to consecutive 8 years total – application allowed
Legal issues: Manifest inadequacy of sentence for robbery, rape, and attempted robbery
Outcome: Application for review of sentence allowed; sentences varied. For the robbery, 3 years; for the rape, 3 years; for the attempted robbery, 2 years, to run consecutively, making a total of 8 years.