|
HCMA237/2006
香港特別行政區
高等法院原訟法庭
刑事上訴司法管轄權
減刑上訴
案件編號：裁判法院上訴案件2006年第237號
(原九龍城裁判法院案件2005年第8080號)
---------------------------
---------------------------
主審法官：高等法院原訟法庭暫委法官彭偉昌
聆訊日期：2006年4月11日
裁決日期：2006年4月11日
判案理由書日期：2006年4月24日
判案理由書
1.上訴人經認罪後被裁定兩項「盜竊」罪成立，分別處入獄12 個月和 4 個月，其中一個月同期執行，即合共15 個月。上訴人不服，現就刑期提出上訴。
2.以下是上訴人認罪時所承認的事實(原文以英文書寫)：
“At former time (1), PW1 was shopping in location (1) with his girl friend. While they were shopping, deft.2 and 1 female kept jostling vtm. on three occasions without any good reason. PW1 became suspicious and paid attention to deft.2 and a female. At latte time (1), PW1 found the zip of his shoulder bag was opened. Upon checking, PW1 found his wallet (exh.1) missing and suspected that it was stolen by deft.2 and the female. PW1 immediately informed the card centre to cancel the stolen credit cards and continued with his shopping. At time (2), PW1 came across deft.2 and the female in location (2), who were together with deft.1. PW1 then kept surveillance on them and saw deft.2 took a leather jacket (exh.2) from a rack, put it on herself and left location (2) with deft.1 & the female and without paying for exh.2. PW1 became confident that his wallet was stolen by deft.2 and the female and made a report. PW1 then followed deft.2 and the female and saw deft.2 passed exh.(2) to deft.1. Shortly afterwards, PW3-5 attended scene and arrested deft.1, 2 and the female, who denied the offence under caution. Upon searching by PW3, exh.1 was found inside the rear left pocket of deft.1’s trousers. In addition, exh.2 was found inside deft.1’s carrier bag (exh.3). Enquiry was then conducted at location (2) and the staff PW2 confirmed that exh.(2) belonged to her shop and had not been sold. Deft.1, 2 and the female were then taken back to Tsimshatsui police station for further enquiry and were later charged with the offence accordingly.”
文中的「deft.1」，即本案上訴人。
3.至於判刑理由，裁判官有以下的說明，原文見裁判官的書面判詞：
「8. 第1被告人在香港沒有案底，29歲，在內地的職業是司機，月入$1,500人民幣。家有59歲的母親和一個智能有問題的妹妹。
……
9. 第1被告人所面對的第1項控罪是與第3被告人共同面對的控罪。該控罪是俗稱‘打荷包’的情形下干犯，所以在判刑時須跟隨有關的案例指印，即以12-15個月為判刑起點。然而，該判刑起點在適當時候須予以提高：
“〔The starting point〕 should be increased if there are aggravating factors such as the use of a weapon, like a razor-blade, or if the offence is committed in a place where the public, though no fault of its own, is at risk....Another aggravating factor which would certainly call for a substantial increase in sentence would be evidence that the offender was acting in concert with others in a well organized gang operation.” - 見 R v. Vy Van Kien and Another [1991] 1 HKLR 422
10. 本案發生在人來人往的購物商場，第1被告人夥同第 2被告人犯案，所以控罪1須以18個月為判刑起點，給予量刑折扣後判監12個月。控罪2是店鋪盜竊，以6個月為判刑起點，給予量刑折扣後判監4個月。兩條控罪牽涉不同的受害人，發生在不同時間，但考慮到刑期的整體性，命令控罪2中的3個月刑期分期執行，共判監15 個月。」
4.本席認為，裁判官的判刑理由充份。反之，上訴人所謂的上訴理據就只是他乃家中經濟支柱，希望能早點回鄉，但這實在不是把刑期下調的埋由。
5.上訴駁回。
控方： 由律政處高級政府律師何眉語代表香港特別行政區。
辯方： 無律師代表，親自出庭。
|