Read the full judgment text of CACC 000336/2001 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 22 February 2002 before Stuart-Moore VP, Lugar-Mawson J.
Criminal law – sentencing – conspiracy to defraud – street deception – common law conspiracy punishable under s.159C(6) of the Crimes Ordinance (Cap 200) – two Mainland applicants pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud a 57-year-old woman by representing scrap electronic components as valuable – fraud interrupted before any loss occurred – sentencing statistics showed street deception exceptionally prevalent, with 455 cases in 1999, 617 in 2000, and 251 in the first half of 2001, and losses of tens of millions of dollars, predominantly committed by Mainlanders – District Court judge adopted 3-year starting point, reduced by one-third to 2 years for guilty plea, then enhanced by 25% under s.27(11) of the Organised and Serious Crimes Ordinance to 2½ years' imprisonment – whether the 3-year starting point was excessive – whether a distinction should be drawn between tricksters appealing to victims' greed and those appealing to victims' superstitious or religious beliefs – HKSAR v MA Suet Chun & O'rs [2001] 4 HKC 337 suggested 50% enhancement for future street deception offences – HKSAR v Cheung Kwun Ching & Anor, CACC 220/2001 (unreported) applied 25% enhancement on a 2½-year starting point for a superstition-based trick – held that there is no tariff for street deception, the gravamen is the fraud itself rather than the victim's motive exploited, and any contrary indication in Cheung Kwun Ching was per incuriam – 3-year starting point and 25% enhancement were not wrong in principle or manifestly excessive – applications for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed – final sentence 2½ years' imprisonment on each applicant – starting point 3 years, one-third plea reduction to 2 years, 25% OSCO enhancement to 2½ years.
Legal issues: Whether the 3-year starting point for street deception conspiracy to defraud is excessive
Outcome: Applications for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed; sentences of 2½ years' imprisonment upheld on each applicant
Cited by 8 cases · Cites 1 case