HKSAR v. Ip Kam Man

DCCC 379/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 379 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

Charge and facts

1.The defendant pleads guilty to a charge of burglary of a domestic premises, namely a hut occupied by Kwang Yu-sheng situated at No. 92 Chung Shun Lane, Hon Ka Road, Tai Po, New Territorities (“the Hut”).

2.At around lunchtime on 15 March 2010, Kwang locked the inner wooden door (“inner door”) as well as the numeric lock of the forecourt wooden door (“forecourt door”) and left the Hut for lunch. However, he had not locked the window. Not long after lunch, he returned and found the forecourt door ajar. He found two $10 coins missing from a table that was placed next to the window. He heard some noise coming from behind the curtain. He saw the Defendant hiding behind the curtain. The Defendant rushed towards the door but was caught by Kwang at the gate near the Hut. Kwang reported the matter to the police.

3.After arrest and caution by the police, the Defendant said that after opening the forecourt door, he failed to open the inner door. So he climbed into the Hut through the window. He found two $10 coins placed on the table and took them. Upon further enquiries, he said that he had entered the Hut to look for cigarettes. He heard some noises as Kwang returned to the Hut. He had been hiding behind the curtain for twenty minutes before Kwang discovered him. He put the two $10 coins onto the bed.

Background and mitigation

4.The defendant is 25 years of age. He has a clear criminal record. He received education up to F. 5. His last job before arrest was as a container terminal worker. Out of a salary of $15,000 per month, he contributed $7,000 to his mother for household expenses. His father had passed away two years ago.

5.He lived next door to the Hut and he knew Kwang. His solicitor informs me that he had taken some Panadol for his influenza before entering the Hut. There is nothing to correlate his background with the offence.

6.There are letters from his mother, uncle, grandfather, former teacher, employer, former schoolmates, colleagues, friends, and fellow Buddhist promoters. They all vouch for his generally good character.

7.The buddhist society has certified that he has rendered voluntary services in the past 3 years. His solicitor informs me that it has taken place regularly once every month or every two months.

Sentencing guidelines for burglary

8.In R v CHAN Yui Man, Cr App 36/1988, the Court of Appeal held that in burglary of domestic premises, 3 years was about the proper starting point for a first offender of full age. This was followed in R v Chan Wing Ching Cr App 100/1991, R v Luk Wai Kit Cr App 99/1992, and R v Wong Man Cr App 372/1992.

Sentencing this Defendant

9.There is nothing in the present case to justify any other penalties than a custodial sentence. I take a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment. I give a one-third discount for the plea of guilty. For his voluntary work, I give an extra reduction of 3 months. There are no other mitigating factors. I sentence him to 1 year and 9 months.