Law Yuk-hong v. The Queen

Case No.CACC 795/1975

Court

Court of Appeal

Date04 Oct 1975

Judge—

Case Document

100%

CACC000795/1975

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 795 OF 1975

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

BETWEEN:
	LAW Yuk-hong	Appellant
	and
	THE QUEEN	Respondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 4th October, 1975.

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

JUDGMENT

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

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to four offences: three separate offences of robbery and one offence of escape from lawful custody. He was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment for each charge of robbery, each sentence to run consecutively and to two months' imprisonment for the escape, such sentence to run concurrently. The total sentence which the appellant will have to serve is therefore three years.

2. He appeals against his sentence.

3. The facts of the first robbery was that the appellant robbed a man and a girl as they were walking in a road at night. He was alone and no weapon was used. However, he got away with a watch and a small amount of money. He was arrested and while under questioning tried to escape through a window which was on the first floor. In doing this, he sustained injuries and now has a crippled leg.

4. The other two robberies came to light as a result of the investigation into the first robbery. In each case the robbery was in the street and money was taken. In addition, in the third case, a knife was used to threaten the victim who was also robbed of his personal jewellery and watch.

5. The appellant is 24 and has a previous conviction for robbery for which he was fined. He has also been convicted for theft for which he was detained in a training centre.

6. In my view the overall sentence of three years is excessive in the circumstances of this case. It is in excess of the usual sentences passed for such offences. Perhaps the magistrate paid too little attention to the pleas of guilty. It would be interesting to know what sentence would have been passed had he pleaded not guilty and been convicted.

7. In the event, I allow the appeal against sentence to the extent that a sentence of six months will be substituted for each of the sentences of twelve months on the robbery charge. These sentences are to be served consecutively and I will not interfere with the sentence of two months on the escaping charge, that sentence will be concurrent with the sentences on the other charges. The appellant will therefore serve a total period of eighteen months in all.

	(Geoffrey Briggs)
	Chief Justice.

Representation:

Appellant in person.

F. Wong for crown/respondent.