Lau Kam-tong and Another v. The Queen

CACC001051/1979

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

Coram: Roberts, C.J., McMullin, J.A., & Leonard, J.

Date of Judgment: 18 January 1980

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

JUDGMENT

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

Leonard, J.:

1. The appellants in this case seek leave to appeal against sentences totalling six years' imprisonment imposed on them for three charges of robbery.

2. The robberies were committed in the street. In all three cases, the victims were males, walking alone in the street, when accosted by the two appellants. In the first case, the victim was told by the appellants not to move or he would be stabbed. A watch and $20 were taken. In the second case, one of the appellants grabbed the victim by the neck from behind, while the other searched his person and took from him $800 cash. The victim of the third robbery was a police officer who had just alighted from a bus when he was confronted by the two appellants. They threatened him and told him that they had knives. They searched him and took $140 from him. They were arrested on information and they admitted their complicity.

3. On the first occasion on which they appeared in the court below they pleaded not guilty but on trial date they reversed these pleas.

4. The appellants have appalling records. They have been drug addicts. The first appellant, aged 30, has previously been sentenced to terms amounting in total to six years' imprisonment. Three of his previous convictions are for similar offences. The second appellant, aged 27, has twice been sentenced to the drug addiction treatment centre. He incurred sentences totalling over eight years' imprisonment and on three occasions has been found guilty of robbery.

5. We nevertheless feel that sentences totalling six years' imprisonment for the three offences under consideration are manifestly excessive. The first appellant pointed out that there was no evidence that either appellant had on any of the three occasions carried a knife or indeed any other weapon. They had both pleaded guilty, albeit not on the first arraignment. Again, as the first appellant pointed out, they had already been punished in respect of their previous convictions. We consider that aggregate sentences of four and a half years' imprisonment were appropriate. We allow the appeal and order the sentences to be varied to sentences of four and a half years' imprisonment on each charge the sentences to be served concurrently.

Representation:

Appellant in person

R.N. Hawkes for Crown/Respondent