HKSAR v. Chiu Lam Kwan

DCCC533/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 533 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to a single offence of burglary, contrary to sections 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210.

2.You admitted the brief facts and I convicted you. Those facts were as follows:

(1)  The premises in question were domestic premises located at the 5th Floor, Kwong Hing Building, at 973 Canton Road, Mongkok.  They are undergoing decoration, and no one resided there at the material time.

(2)  Very fairly, Mr Tsang concedes on behalf of the prosecution that the premises were in fact unfurnished.

3.PW1 was a decoration worker. At about 7.30 pm, on 29 March last he left the premises secured and his tools therein. Those tools included a power saw valued at $1,500, two Makita power planes valued at $2,700, a ram-setting gun valued at $1,000, a carpenter’s level valued at $1,500, a power drill valued at $500, and a hydraulic breaker valued at $1,300. Mr Tsang informs me that the total value therefore is $8,500 for those tools.

4.PW1 returned at 7.30 am on the next day, that is 30 March, to find the iron gate had been prised and his tools missing.

5.At about 8.50 am on that day, a police officer PW2 saw you acting furtively outside No. 139 Pei Ho Street, Shamshuipo. He intercepted you and in three bags placed in a trolley, he found the abovementioned tools. You claimed to have found and picked them up in the street. You asked for a chance. PW2 arrested you on suspicion of theft, and under caution, you repeated what you had said prior.

6.Later at the police station, in an interview under caution, you again claimed to have picked up the tools in the street but could not recall where. You admitted intending to sell them to a hardware shop close to where you were arrested.

7.At about 12.40 pm that same day in Shamshuipo Police Station, PW1 identified the tools as his.

8.You admitted to 21 previous convictions on 15 occasions, only two of which were for dishonesty. The majority related to dangerous drugs, and I noted that you had been out of trouble for approximately 10 years.

9.On your behalf, Mr Tsang entered mitigation. He told me that you are 59 years of age, separated and unemployed. You are living on comprehensive social security payments. He stressed that you had been out of trouble since 2001, and explained this in terms of you becoming a Christian. However, he informed me that you had since lapsed back to drugs, and the reason you committed this offence was to raise money for the same.

10.In mitigation, he stressed your plea of guilty, that all goods had been returned, and that the goods stolen were of relatively modest value.

11.I turn now to the sentence. Mr Tsang on behalf of the prosecution made a very proper and fair concession, that is, the premises were unoccupied and unfurnished that it would be proper to treat them as non-domestic premises.

12.I agree with that. On that basis, I will sentence you.

13.I have taken into account all the mitigation that has been advanced. I take as a starting point that for a burglary of non-domestic premises being 30 months and reduce it to 20 months for your plea of guilty. You will go to prison for 20 months.