Shum Ka Kui and Others v. The Queen

Case No.CACC 705/1975

Court

Court of Appeal

Date16 Oct 1975

Judge—

Case Document

100%

CACC000705/1975

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.705 OF 1975

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

BETWEEN
	SHUM KA KUI	Appellants
	CHAN CHI HOI
	HUNG YIN KAI
	and
	THE QUEEN	Respondent

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

Coram: Huggins & McMullin, JJ.

Date of Judgment: 16th October 1975.

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

JUDGMENT

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

Huggins, J.:

1. These three Appellants appeal against their sentences on a charge of robbery. The first Appellant, who is 24 years of age, was sentenced to five years' imprisonment and the other two, who are some six or seven years younger, were sentenced to three years' imprisonment. The first and third Appellants had clear records but the second had five previous convictions and was in fact under a suspended sentence at the time that he was convicted. The learned judge activated that sentence, with the result that a sentence of ten months' imprisonment in addition to the three years has to be served by the second Appellant.

2. This was a robbery of a business office in broad daylight. The staff of the office took the precaution of keeping their door locked but the first Appellant tricked them into opening the door and then immediately produced a triangular file, with which he threatened one of the staff. The other two Appellants armed with knives then followed him into the premises.

3. The learned judge justly took a serious view of the case and we see no reason at all to interfere with the sentences on the second and third Appellants. We have been anxious about the sentence of the first Appellant. Although he was the oldest and was there fore assumed by the judge to be the ringleader, and although it was he who in the first place gained access to the premises, we cannot help thinking that the disparity between the sentence passed on him and that passed on the other two was too great. Moreover, we doubt whether sufficient weight has been given to the plea of Guilty by this Appellant.

4. We shall allow the appeal of the first Appellant to the extent that a sentence of four years' imprisonment is substituted. The appeals of the second and third are dismissed.

16th October 1975.

Representation: