The Queen v. Tang Kwok-man
|
CACC000075/1983
BETWEEN
___________ Coram: McMullin, V.-P., Li & Silke, JJ.A. Date: 30th March 1983 __________ JUDGMENT __________ Silke, J.A.: 1. The applicant appeals against his sentence of five and an half years' imprisonment imposed upon conviction for an offence of robbery. 2. He had also been charged with indecent assault which, we are informed, was not proceeded with upon his plea of guilty to the robbery. 3. At first sight the summary of facts suggested a severe robbery carried out while the applicant was in possession of and using a pair of so scissors. But in the court below, the applicant contested the summary of facts in relation to that and in relation to the kicking of the victim who was a lady. 4. The trial judge, very properly, heard evidence upon the issue and, having done so, said he found as fact that no knife or sharp object was used and that there was no kicking on the chest of the victim. But there was a struggle in which force was used. 5. The applicant has urged upon us the fact that he did plead guilty, that this was a crime committed on the spur of the moment and that he had been without employment for some time prior to the offence. With surprising frankness he said that he picked upon a woman because he was not strong enough to pick upon a man. The only matter of mitigation that he has drawn to our attention is the fact of his plea of guilty. 6. He did have two previous convictions which were minor. He has also urged upon us the plight of his family resulting from his actions - a plea unfortunately common in these courts. The plight of a family should be a matter for consideration before and should deter people from committing offences of this nature rather than be something to be pleaded in mitigation of sentence at a later stage." 7. It is true that the trial judge, in passing sentence, did say that:
We think that he did not give sufficient credit for that plea and for the saving of time which that plea permitted. 8. MO Kwong Sang(l) sets out the guidelines for armed robbery sentences after trial. There was some violence which does aggrevate the simple robbery but this was not an armed robbery. 9. In the light of this we think ourselves to be justified in reducing the sentence from five and an half years to one of four and an half years. 10. The application for leave to appeal will be granted, the hearing of the application treated as the hearing of the appeal and the appeal allowed to the extent that the sentence of five and an half years is quashed and is substituted by one of four and an half years. 11. The plight of the applicant's family is to be drawn to the attention of the Social Welfare Department which may be able to assist - there are three very young children involved. (1) (1981) H.K.L.R. 610 Representation: Applicant in person. Miss M.A. Crabtree, for Crown/Respondent. |