The Queen v. Ying Yu Fai

HCMA001684/1988

MA No.1684 of 1988

______________

H E A D N O T E

______________

PICKPOCKET - SENTENCE - 15 MONTHS STARTING POINT.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1684 OF 1988

____________

BETWEEN

______________

Coram: Hon. Bewley, J. in Court

Date of hearing: 3 March 1989

Date of delivery of judgment: 3 March 1989

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. The appellant was convicted of theft of a wallet at Sheung Shui Station by Mr B.R.P. Todd and was sentenced to two years imprisonment.

2. His appeal against conviction is without merit. Two plain clothes police constables had been observing a group of five men, including the appellant, who boarded several Lowu bound trains but returned to the platform before the trains departed. Finally they saw one of these men remove a wallet from the waistband of a passenger and pass it to the appellant on board the train. When these two men left the train they were arrested and the wallet was found on the appellant. The victim noticed his loss as the train was pulling out of the station. He made a report at Lowu and subsequently identified his wallet. The appellant did not give evidence.

3. His only ground of appeal was that his co-defendant - the man who is alleged to have taken the wallet - was acquitted in a separate trial. They were tried separately because the appellant jumped bail. The appellant says he had had to go to China for a funeral and he had asked his lawyer to seek an adjournment.

4. There is no information before me as to what took place at the other trial. It is, in any case, irrelevant. The evidence in this trial was clear and cogent arid the magistrate was perfectly justified in accepting it.

5. As to sentence, this court has said more than once that the starting point for sentence for this offence should be in the region of 15 months. See for example R. v. LEUNG Kin-bor M.A. 774/88 and R. v. CHUNG Chi-kuen M.A. 285/88.

6. This was organised pickpocketing, there were no mitigating circumstances and the sentence therefore should be at the top of the range.

7. The appeal is allowed and the sentence reduced to 15 months.

Representation:

Mr M.D. Wilson, Crown Counsel, for Respondent

Mr A. Sakrani (assigned by D.L.A.) for Appellant (Re Sentence)

Appellant in person (Re conviction)