HKSAR v. Gao Chao

Case No.DCCC 1173/2008
Court
District Court
Date15 Jan 2009
Judge
Case Document
100%

DCCC1173/2008

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1173 OF 2008

 ----------------------

  HKSAR  
  v.  
  Gao Chao  

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

Before:   H H Judge S. D'Almada Remedios

Date: 15 January 2009 at 10.31 am

Present:

Miss Sezen Chong, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Ting Koon-hung, of Messrs Angus Tse, Yuen & Ting, assigned by the Legal Aid Department, for the Defendant

Offence:  Burglary, etc. (入屋犯法等罪項)

 

Reasons for Sentence

 

1. Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to two charges before this court.  The 1st charge is that of burglary and the 2nd charge is that of remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration after having landed unlawfully in Hong Kong.

2. Both offences were committed on the same day, 11 October 2008.  On that day, you entered Hong Kong unlawfully, and, having done so, you also entered as a trespasser of a building known as No. 36 Belair Villa, No. 9 Yu Tai Road, Fanling, and stole cash of HK$$3,400.

3. At about 9.09 am on 11 October 2008, whilst a domestic helper was returning to her bedroom inside the said premises, she saw a male running out from her bedroom.  She cried out for help and that male fled.  It later came to be known that that male was you.  You stole cash of $3,400 from her in her bedroom.

4. Approximately an hour later, the same day, a police officer saw you washing your head in the courtyard outside a hut at Wai Hon Road, Sheung Shui.  You were intercepted by the officer and failed to provide any proof of your identity.  It was also found in your possession cash of HK$3,400.  The police officer inquired from you about the burglary that happened at Belair Villa.  Under caution, you told the police officer that you intended to go into it to find something to eat, “But I found some money, so I took it.  I am sorry.”

5. On the following day at about 10.40 am, a cautioned statement was taken from you.  You admitted that you had sneaked into Hong Kong from China in the small hours on 11 October 2008.  You intended to find something to eat in the flat, and, having entered the flat, you found some money in the room and therefore you took the money out of greediness.  You bumped into someone in the flat but you fled and left the flat.

6. Mr Ting, your solicitor, has made full and detailed mitigation on your behalf and I have taken into account all that he has had to say.  You are 30 years of age.  You come from China and have a clear record.  You are originally from Dongguan in China and worked there in a hotel.  You were, I am told, doing quite well there and due for promotion and a salary increase but you were dismissed because of a conflict between different streams of management.

7. You then went to Shenzhen to try and find some other work.  While in the park in Shenzhen, however, your money and your PRC permit were stolen and you were told by people in Shenzhen that if you came to Hong Kong to work you could earn an income of $200 to $300 a day.  Therefore, you decided to come to Hong Kong.

8. Mr Ting has rightly pointed out in respect of this case, it is a domestic burglary for which the usual starting point after a trial is one of 3 years’ imprisonment and for the 2nd charge it is a usual term of 15 months’ imprisonment.

9. I accept that you are truly remorseful for your crime and that without your admission the police would certainly have a very difficult case against you.  Although somebody was in the premises and no doubt you did frighten her, you had expected these premises to be vacant at the time.  There was nobody injured or property damaged and I take into account the fact that your admission to this offence has certainly assisted the prosecution’s case immensely.

10. For the offence of burglary, I take a starting point after trial of 3 years’ imprisonment.  I give you full credit for your plea of guilty and reduce that term to one of 2 years’ imprisonment.  For the 2nd charge of illegal remaining in Hong Kong, that, as laid down in So Man King, should be a sentence of 15 months’ imprisonment.

11. As your solicitor, Mr Ting, rightly points out that for these two offences they should be served consecutive to each other.  In the circumstances, Charge 2 shall run consecutive to Charge 1 and the total term of imprisonment should be therefore 3 years and 3 months’ imprisonment, to which you are so sentenced.

  (S. D'Almada Remedios)
District Judge