HKSAR v. Wong Ping Hung

DCCC 1189/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1189 OF 2011

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

Charges and facts

1.The Defendant pleads guilty to burglary (1^st Charge) and theft (2^nd Charge).  The proprietor locked his restaurant, which was under renovation, upon leaving.  It was situated in a market stall.  In the small hours, the Defendant entered and stole an LCD television set, a digital television top box and a DVD player, valued at $19,200 in total in terms of purchase price.  He also stole a trolley outside the stall to aid the removal of the property.  Upon discovery of the loss, the proprietor returned to the premises afterwards and reported the matter to the police.  The Defendant’s offending acts were revealed upon the police viewing the CCTV footages. 

2.Traced to the outside of a public housing estate, he was arrested and cautioned.  He said he had entered the restaurant through an open door.  He placed the stolen items in a bush nearby to await his retrieval and sale in due course.  They could not be recovered, though.   

Personal background and mitigation put forward

3.He is 37 years of age, F. 1 education level.  His aged parents live on public assistance.  He last worked as a casual decoration worker.  He has 12 previous convictions for theft from 2006 to 2009.  His solicitor accepts that he has to be regarded as a recidivist.  That is an aggravating factor in his sentence.   

4.His solicitor contends that although he admits having broken the lock as he wanted to enter to steal, he has to be regarded as an opportunistic burglar.  I find no merit in this contention. 

Sentencing guidelines

5.In R v Wong Man [1993] 1 HKC 80, the Court of Appeal said that the proper starting point for non-domestic premises would be 2½ years’ imprisonment for a first offender of full age, as later affirmed in HKSAR v Sim Ka-wing, CACC450/2000.

6.There are no sentencing guidelines for theft. 

The sentence I pass

7.Owing to his recidivism (as the present burglary was to enter to steal), I take a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment.  I give a one-third discount for the plea of guilty.  There are no other mitigating factors.  The sentence is 2 years for the 1^st Charge.   

8.I take 6 months as the starting point for theft of the trolley.  I give a one-third discount for the plea of guilty.  There are no other mitigating factors.  The sentence is 4 months for the 2^nd Charge.   

9.Both charges pertain to the same enterprise.  The sentences shall be concurrent.