Chow Kei @ Chow Kwai-kei v. The Queen

CACC000412/1974

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 412 OF 1974

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

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

Coram: Leonard J. in Court

Date of Judgment: 25th June, 1974.

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

JUDGMENT

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

1. This is an appeal against sentence.

2. In the court below the appellant pleaded guilty to three charges. The first of these was of robbery in the course of which the appellant was armed with a small knife, the second was of simple wounding and the third of resisting arrest. For these offences the appellant was sentenced to terms of two years' imprisonment, nine months' imprisonment (consecutive) and one month's imprisonment (concurrent). He appeals only against the sentence of nine months' imprisonment on the wounding charge.

3. The "wounding" was of the robbery victim who suffered from "abrasions". These are, as the learned magistrate points out, by medical definition, "wounds" in that the continuity of the whole skin is broken. The appellant was, therefore, technically correct to plead guilty to wounding (although he has sought, unsuccessfully, to retract his plea before me). The word "abrasion" is, however, wholly inappropriate to describe a knife wound and there is nothing in the facts which the appellant admitted in the court below to indicate that the abrasions were caused other than in the appellant's struggle to escape. The knife was used to put the victim in fear - not to wound him.

4. The appellant aged 25 has two previous convictions; neither is for violence or dishonesty. Robbery with a knife is, of course, a most prevalent offence at present and one requiring an exemplary sentence and had the "wounding" been with the knife I should have no hesitation in upholding a consecutive sentence in respect of it. I do not think I should do so in a case where abrasions were caused in the struggle to escape when the knife was not used in the struggle. The "wounding" was part and parcel of the robbery. The appeal is therefore allowed to the extent that the sentence of nine months' imprisonment shall be concurrent with the sentence of two years' imprisonment on the robbery charge.

Representation:

Appellant in person.

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