R. v. Ip Sun
Read the full judgment text of CACC 386/1995 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 30 November 1995.
1. The applicant was convicted in the District Court by Deputy Judge Geiser of four offences: criminal damage for which he was sentenced to four years' imprisonment, wounding with intent for which he was sentenced to three years' imprisonment, assault occasioning actual bodily harm for which he was sentenced to two years' imprisonment and common assault for which he was sentenced to six months' imprisonment. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
|
CACC000386/1995 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 1995, No.386
---------------- Coram: Hon Mortimer and Mayo, JJ.A. and Bewley, J. in Court Date of hearing: 30 November 1995 Date of judgment: 30 November 1995 ------------------------ J U D G M E N T ------------------------ Bewley, J.: (Giving the judgment of the court) 1. The applicant was convicted in the District Court by Deputy Judge Geiser of four offences: criminal damage for which he was sentenced to four years' imprisonment, wounding with intent for which he was sentenced to three years' imprisonment, assault occasioning actual bodily harm for which he was sentenced to two years' imprisonment and common assault for which he was sentenced to six months' imprisonment. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The applicant applied for leave to appeal against both conviction and sentence. Today he has abandoned his application in respect of conviction which stands dismissed. 3. At 3:15 am on 15th April, 1994, six or seven men armed with knives, poles and baseball bats rushed into the Mandarin Palace Nightclub in Marsh Road, Wanchai. They smashed glass fixtures and television sets to the value of approximately $100,000. They also struck indiscriminately at persons they encountered. The victim of the wounding charge suffered a 3 cm skull laceration and spent two days in hospital. 4. The judge was satisfied that the applicant had been correctly identified as a member of the group. He found he had taken part in a joint enterprise to damage property and assault people found in the premises. He appears to have taken a global approach to sentence. He does not say what his starting point was but he recognised that there was little to be said in mitigation. We are unable to say that four years is manifestly excessive for behaviour of this kind and we dismiss the application for leave to appeal against sentence.
Representation: Mr D. Saw, S.A.C.P., for Crown Applicant, Ip Sun in person |