HKSAR v. Cheung Yuk Tong

Case No.HCCC 203/2009

Court

High Court CFI

Date01 Dec 2009

Judge—

Case Document

100%

HCCC203/2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 203 OF 2009

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

	HKSAR
	v.
	Cheung Yuk-tong

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

Before:

Hon M Poon J

Date:

1 December 2009 at 10.09 am

Present:

Mr Duncan Percy, on fiat, for HKSAR
Mr Ng Kin-man, Ken, instructed by Ma Tang & Co., assigned by the DLA, for the Accused

Offence:

(1) to (8) & (10) Robbery (搶劫)
(9) Assault with intent to rob (意圖搶劫而襲擊他人)
(11) Possession of a dangerous drug (管有危險藥物)

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to a total of seven charges of robbery, contrary to section 10(1) and (2) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210.

Facts relating to the charges reveal that between 28 December 2008 and 16 January 2009, having armed himself with either paper-cutters or cutters, defendant robbed various 7-Eleven Convenience Stores at early hours. The stolen amount varied from $1,230 to $6,000 and on one occasion he also stole a pack of cigarettes. On each of the last two occasions he borrowed a cutter from one convenience store and used that in the course of robbing another store. Upon arrest, he admitted robbing the convenience stores in question because he had no money.

The defendant is aged 28, married, with a clear record. It is advanced on his behalf that he committed the offence because of financial difficulty and addiction to drugs. It is also urged that whilst he was involved in seven robberies, no harm or injuries were caused to anyone and the amount stolen on each occasion could not be said to be great.

In sentencing the defendant, I have taken into account the facts of the present case, mitigation advanced and the sentencing tariffs. According to the case of Mo Kwong Sang for armed robberies where knives or other dangerous weapons, including cutters, are displayed in the course of the robbery, the starting point should normally be 5 years. That authority went on to suggest an upward adjustment should there exist other various aggravating features; multiplicity of offences of a similar kind is one of those.

I am of the view that, given the totality of all seven charges, an overall starting point of 10 years is appropriate. I shall give him the full one-third discount for his guilty plea. On each charge he is sentenced to 80 months, that is 6 years and 8 months, to run concurrently.