HKSAR v. Cheong Sow Choy

DCCC487/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 487 OF 2011

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you pleaded guilty to two offences of using a false instrument and one offence of possessing a false instrument, contrary to section 73 and 75(1) respectively of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap.200.

2.You admitted the brief facts and I convicted you.  Briefly, what happened is this.

3.At about 4 pm on 19 March this year you went to Fortress at the basement, Home World, Whampoa Garden, Hung Hom.  You told PW1, a member staff in that shop, that you wanted to purchase 2 Nokia mobile phones valued at HK$5,126.  You presented a nab VISA card in the name of Kenny Cheong S C, which is Card 1, but it was rejected.  You then presented a citi VISA in the same name, which is Card 2.  PW1 being suspicious called the card centre where he was informed that Card 2 was in fact forged and he called the police. Police arrived and PW1 handed over Card 2.

4.Upon searching you, the officer found Card 1 and also a HSBC VISA card in the same name, Card 3, both were in the right front trousers pocket. 

5.Under caution, you made admissions.  You said you came to Hong Kong on 18 March 2011.  Your friend Ah Sang had given you the cards which you knew to be forged.  You intended to purchase 2 mobile phones. 

6.Forensic examination showed the cards to be indeed forged, and record showed that you arrived from Malaysia as a visitor on 18 March. 

7.You are a man of hitherto clear record.

8.Mr Pang on your behalf entered mitigation. First of all, he dealt with your personal circumstances.  He told me that you are 48 years of age, Malaysian-born, single, educated to P.6 and a cook by occupation.  You earned an equivalent of HK$4,000 per month.  You resided with your younger brother. 

9.Turning to the offences themselves, I am told that you committed these offences out of greed, intending to obtain 2 mobile phones, one for yourself and one for your girlfriend. 

10.Mr Pang placed before me three sentencing authorities, HKSAR v Tu I Lang, Court of Appeal No.464 of 2006, where it was said that a starting point of 3 years or less was appropriate in those circumstances, and two decisions of my own, HKSAR v Chu Yun Cheong, DCC No. 1402 of 2009, and HKSAR v Ho Ka Bing, DCC13 of 2011. 

11.This present case is strikingly similar to the latter decision where I took a starting point of 3 years, reduced to 2 years for a plea of guilty.  In that case the defendant came from Malaysia; it involved 2 cards.  There was no evidence of a syndicate and it was a small-scale operation.  The value of the goods involved was also very similar to the goods involved in this case.  Therefore, I intend to follow that approach.

12.Whilst there are 3 offences, it is in fact one course of conduct.  I therefore take an overall starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment, reduced to 2.  You will be sentenced to an imprisonment of 2 years on each of the 3 offences, to be served concurrently, a total of 2 years’ imprisonment.