Read the full judgment text of CACC 000466/1987 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 26 January 1988 before Yang, V.-P., Barker & Power JJ.A..
Criminal law – armed robbery – sentencing – totality principle – consecutive sentences – application of section 68 of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap 221) – disparity between co-accused – whether aggregate of 11 years' imprisonment excessive – whether Court should order partial concurrency. The applicant and three others committed an armed robbery of a family home where physical violence was used, the husband, wife, and two young children were tied up, the premises were ransacked, and the male victim was forced under threats to write cheques totalling HK$100,000 after a whole night of captivity. The applicant had previously been sentenced to 5 years' imprisonment for a similar robbery committed two weeks earlier. He was sentenced to 6 years' imprisonment for the present offence, ordered to run consecutively to the 5-year sentence, giving an aggregate of 11 years. The applicant gave valuable assistance to the police by making a statement inculpating his co-accused, agreeing to testify, and pleading guilty before his co-accused did, while his co-accused ultimately served only 6 years. Whether the totality of 11 years was excessive – held, yes; the totality was excessive and the sentencing judge did not pay sufficient attention to section 68 of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance. Whether s.68 should be invoked to achieve the proper totality – held, yes; the Court ordered 2 years of the 6-year sentence to run concurrently with the 5-year sentence, giving an effective total of 9 years. Application for leave to appeal granted; appeal treated as heard. Starting point of 8 years on a trial was not criticised; one-third discount for guilty plea noted. Sentence reduced to achieve 9 years' effective imprisonment in totality under s.68 of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap 221).
Legal issues: Whether totality of consecutive sentences is excessive · Whether s.68 Criminal Procedure Ordinance applies to adjust concurrency
Outcome: Application for leave to appeal against sentence granted; 2 years of the 6-year sentence ordered to run concurrently with the 5-year sentence, giving an effective total of 9 years' imprisonment.
Cited by 7 cases