Yeung Wai-keung v. The Queen

CACC000252/1974

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRININAL APPEAL NO. 252 OF 1974

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

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

Coram: Loenard J. in Court.

Date of Judgment: 14th May, 1974.

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

JUDGMENT

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

1. The appellant in this case pleaded guilty to two charges of robbery.

2. The victim of the first charge in point of time that occurring on the 9th of March 1974 was a labourer. He was walking past to Block 1, Shek Kip Mei Estate when he was approached by the appellant and another. One of the two attackers grabbed him by the ncck, the other searched and robbed him of $10. The appellant was the one who searched him.

3. The second of the instances in point of time occurred at Wor Chai Street near Street near Shek Kip Mei Estate when the appellant and another Chinese male approached a boy and tapped him on the shoulder, terrorized him and he gave them $5. They said that it was not enough, pushed him to a wall and were threatening him when they were seen by alert police officers. The appellant's friend got away but the appellant was arrested.

4. It will be noted in particular that the robbers in question were in no way ambitious. They were robbing for small sums only, neither was in possession of any weapon. Notwithstanding the fact that robberies of this kind are almost daily occurrences in Kowloon, I consider the sentence of two and a half years imposed in this case was manifestly excessive.

5. The appellant is a young man of 22 years. He has been found guilty on three occasions of possession of dangerous drugs. On one occasion he was placed on probation and on the other two occasions he was sentenced to Drug Addiction Treatment Centre. He has two convictions for unlawful possession the latter one of which he received a sentence of imprisonment. The first offence in point of time the second in charge appears to me to be the more serious of these offences.

6. I consider that the sentence of twelve months' imprisonment imposed for that offence should stand. The sentence imposed on the first charge of eighteen months will be altered to a sentence of six months. That sentence to be consecutive. This appeal is allowed to that extent.

Representation:

Appellant in person.

Mr. Niamatullah, C.C. for the Crown/Respondent.