HKSAR v. Yip Yuk Sum

DCCC257/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 257 OF 2011

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant has pleaded guilty to one offence of robbery. He has accepted the facts and I have convicted him of that offence.

2.The facts show that the offence occurred in the early morning of 14 January 2011.  The victim was aged 16.  He was walking along with an iPhone 4 in his hand.  The defendant approached and punched the victim on his face and snatched the phone.  The victim decided to try and get his phone back and there was a chase and the struggle between the defendant and the victim.  In the course of this the victim fell to the ground, hitting his head on the railings.  They continued struggling and eventually, after about two minutes, the police arrived.

3.The defendant was arrested, and he said he asked for a chance, that he snatched the phone because he had no money.  Fortunately the victim’s injuries were not serious.  He had tenderness and abrasion on the scalp and was discharged on the same day he went to hospital.  The iPhone was valued at $4,600-odd.

4.The defendant in this case is of clear record. He is only 19 years old, so I obtained some reports to see how he could have come to this situation.  The results of the reports were that the defendant is not suitable for detention in a detention centre or a training centre, the reason for that being that he suffers from drug addiction. 

5.There is a comprehensive report from the Correctional Services Department, of which the conclusion is of some use and help in sentencing the defendant.  The defendant comes, I am told, from a broken family and did not have sufficient guidance and supervision from parental figures.  From a young age, about from Form 1, the defendant became associated with what they describe as “dubious peers”, triad society members. He was eventually cautioned for theft but his behaviour deteriorated and he started to abuse drugs such as cannabis.  He left school in 2006 after completing only Form 2 and then started to take drugs, including Ice and cocaine. It appears he has been involved in some illegal activities and drug taking since then.  I am told that earlier this year he joined a triad society, and of course he committed the present offence.

6.The medical officer has declared(?) the defendant a drug addict, so that itself rendered him unsuitable for detention training centre. 

7.In sentencing the defendant one must look firstly at the offence he has committed.  It is a robbery, which is a serious offence.  It is a robbery in the street involved in the application of quite a bit of violence in the use of a punch to the face and then further violence as a result of the victim trying to get his phone back with fortunately only minor injuries to the victim.

8.On the side of what I can describe as mitigating the offence there is the defendant’s youth.  He is still at an age when one could look for some kind of rehabilitation, but his drug addiction to a certain extent stands in the way of that.  The defendant must, to a certain extent, benefit from his youth and his previous clear record.       

9.This is what one would describe as an “unarmed robbery”, with the application of physical force.  Now, in an unarmed robbery a starting point for sentence as high as 4 years' imprisonment can be adopted.  This is a case where the defendant acted alone and, as I said, that a certain amount of violence was used but fortunately no serious injury caused.

10.I have decided that in respect of this case I would adopt a starting point at 42 months’ imprisonment.  The defendant is entitled to a one-third discount from that sentence.  This gives a final sentence of 28 months’ imprisonment, which would give sufficient time for the Correctional Services Department also to deal with the defendant’s drug addiction whilst he is in custody because they can transfer him, at least for a part of his sentence, to a drug addiction treatment centre if they consider it to be appropriate.  I will leave the Correctional Services to make that decision and impose a sentence of 28 months’ imprisonment.