Lam Yiu Fong v. The Queen

CACC000544/1972

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 544 OF 1972

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

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

Coram: Leonard, J.

Date of Judgment: 10th August 1972

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

JUDGMENT

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

1. This is an appeal against a sentence of twelve months' imprisonment for the offence of robbery.

2. The victim of the robbery was a Chinese male aged 64 years and the robbery occurred in the late hours of the night of the 10th June 1972 when the victim was returning home on foot. When in Cheung Lok Street, Kowloon, he was suddenly attacked from behind and was grasped by the neck by the defendant. Although he struggled so severely throttled that he could not move. Both parties fell to the ground and notwithstanding his struggle, the victim was deprived of his wrist watch. Fortunately, there were two police officers on patrol in the vicinity. They helped the victim and arrested the accused recovering the watch from his possession. As a result of the strangle-hold on his neck, the victim sustained injury for which he was treated in hospital.

3. In the court below the accused had nothing to say in mitigation of his offence. When he appeared before me he had nothing to say in support of his appeal against sentence. The accused, a man of 22 years of age, had a bad record. He had twice been treated with considerable leniency as a juvenile for the offence of larceny. On the first occasion, no penalty was imposed but a conviction was recorded. On the second occasion, he was bound over in the sum of $100 for one year. On the 23rd July 1971, he was convicted of possession of offensive weapon. For this offence, he was again treated leniently being fined $300. In November, 1971 he was again found guilty of possession of an offensive weapon and also of the offence of robbery and was sentenced to two months' imprisonment and nine months' imprisonment respectively for those offences, the sentences to run concurrently. On the 24th of May in this year, he was found guilty of loitering and was bound over in the sum of $200 for twelve months.

4. Having regard to his record, the brutal nature of the robbery, the age of the victim, and to a fact that a previous sentence of nine months' imprisonment had apparently in no way dissuaded the appellant from violent crime, I questioned the appellant closely as to his reasons for appealing. The only relevant factor that emerged from my questioning was that the appellant had been out of work for a period of about twelve months although that he was a strong-looking, well-built young man. In all the circumstances I had no doubt that the sentence in the court below was quite inadequate particularly having regard to the prevalence of this kind of offence in the area in question.

5. I accordingly increased the sentence to one of eighteen months' imprisonment.

Representation:

Appellant in person.

Stevenson for Respondent.