HKSAR v. Lin Weiqing

HCMA748/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.748 OF 2011

(ON APPEAL FROM KCCC 3559 OF 2011)

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

Before : Hon M. Poon J in Court

Date of Hearing : 16 December 2011

Date of Judgment : 16 December 2011

Date of Handing Down Reasons for Judgment : 23 December 2011

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

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

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

1.The appellant pleaded guilty to the one charge of Theft, contrary to Section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210, and one charge of Possession of an identity card relating to another, contrary to Section 7A(1A) of the Registration of Persons Ordinance, Cap. 177. She was sentenced to 10 months’ imprisonment on Charge 1 and 12 months’ imprisonment on Charge 2. It was ordered that 6 months out of the sentence on Charge 2 be served consecutively, making a total of 16 months’ imprisonment. The appellant now appeals these sentences.

2.The appellant was seen standing closely behind a woman, put her right hand into the woman’s handbag, took out an I-phone and left.  The appellant was intercepted by police and the I-phone was recovered.  Enquires were made, with the woman confirmed that she was the owner of that I-phone.  The appellant admitted the offence of theft and said she acted out of momentary greed.  An identity card in the name of ‘Sriyatun’ was found in the appellant’s wallet.  Under caution, she said she had picked it up on the street at an earlier time.  The identity card was confirmed to be a genuine one.  The holder of the said identity card was located and said she had lost it in the Mongkok area on a few days earlier.

Grounds of appeal

3.The grounds of appeal are that she is the only child and wanted to be released as soon as possible to take care of her mother.  The sentence was too severe.

Respondent’s reply

4.Counsel for the respondent submitted that the individual sentences were entirely in line with the authorities and the magistrate, in ordering partially consecutive sentences, had correctly taken into consideration the totality principle.  There was nothing put forward to justify a departure from those guidelines and the sentences were entirely proper. 

My judgment

5.The magistrate has rightly followed the guidelines laid down in the case of HKSAR v Ngo Van Huy [2005] 2 HKLRD 1 in respect of the Charge 1 and HKSAR v Li Chang Li, HCMA935A/2004 in respect of the Charge 2. She also took into account the totality principle in ordering 6 months be served consecutively.  The sentences and approach are entirely proper. 

6.The appellant endeavoured to advance humanitarian grounds.  These are, I must say, grounds not uncommonly advanced in other cases of similar nature.  I do not consider such constitute humanitarian considerations.

7.I affirm the sentences and dismiss the appeal.

Ms Jasmine Ching, SPP, of Department of Justice, for the Respondent

The Appellant, in person