HKSAR v. Wong Ling Yee

DCCC1261/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1261 OF 2009

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of burglary. The place was a restaurant in High Street, Hong Kong, and she stole a sum of $1,500 cash.

The facts of the case

2.PW1 was a trainee chef of the restaurant. At about 6.30 am, he left the restaurant without locking the door. When he returned to the restaurant shortly he saw the defendant was at the cashier counter with money in her hand. The defendant asked for a chance and said that she just took away a few hundred dollars.

3.Police came and confirmed that $1,500 was stolen. Under caution, the defendant admitted that she had no money and wanted to take a few hundred only. She also said she walked past the restaurant; she found the door was unlocked. She went in, found a screwdriver nearby and prised open the drawer at the cashier counter.

The criminal record

4.The defendant had 24 convictions, 2 convictions related to burglary offences. Most of the other convictions were dangerous drugs and selling infringing copyright works offences.

Mitigation

5.The defendant is 45, single; father passed away; mother left home when she was young. She used to be a cleaning worker and earned about $6,000 before the arrest. She was also a dangerous drugs abuser for 10 years. In mitigation, I was told the defendant was in fact an opportunistic burglar. She went into the restaurant when she found that the door of the restaurant was not locked and the sum involved was $1,500.

Sentence

6.This is a non-domestic burglary. The usual starting point is 2½ years. As pointed out by the defence, in Sim Ka Wing’s case, CACC450/2000, that conventional starting point of 2½ years’ imprisonment for the burglary of non‑domestic premises related to burglaries with no aggregating or mitigating factors. Such burglaries will involve a measure of planning and thus a degree of premeditation and planning is already built into the conventional starting point. The conventional starting point can be lower in the case of the opportunistic burglar, akin perhaps to the sneak thief who walks into an open office to steal whatever he can find.

7.In the present case, the prosecution case was that when PW1 left the restaurant, the glass door of the restaurant was left unlocked. The defendant walked past and entered the restaurant to steal. The screwdriver also belonged to the restaurant. The defendant did not take it with her when she entered the restaurant but she had to use the screwdriver to prise open the door in order to steal the money contained inside. There was no evidence of premeditation and planning. To this extent, I agree with the defence that I should adopt a lower starting point.

8.I therefore adopt 2 years and 3 months as a starting point. I reduce one-third of the sentence and it comes to 18 months.