HKSAR v. Fung Wai Kwong

DCCC45/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 45 OF 2012

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant I found you guilty after trial of burglary contrary to Section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210.

2.I found that between 11 March and 12 March between the hours of 8 pm and 8 am, you entered as a trespasser a premises at the Ground Floor, Tai Hang Building, 18 Yuen Long Tung Tai Street, New Territories, then occupied by a company known as Siu Yip Metal and Waste Paper Company.  I found that you had stolen 20 baskets containing copper wire, one computer monitor and four handcarts.  You had broken the iron metal chain of the roller shutter of the shop and entered into the shop and stole those goods.

3.The evidence against you was a surgical mask that was found inside the premises that was not there on the evening before containing your DNA.  The owner of the shop did not know you; had never seen you before and you had no relation whatsoever with that shop. 

4.Your counsel, Mr Cheung, has told me that you have two children and your daughter is not well; she is suffering from Central Hyperventilation Syndrome, which means that she needs to stay on a ventilator to support her breathing. 

5.You are 42 years of age and have a long list of convictions amounting to 23 items.  Your first offence was committed when you were young in 1977 and since then you have been in and out of prison continuously.  Eleven of your convictions are for offences relating to dishonesty which are similar to this present offence of burglary.

6.You have two similar offences committed in 1998 of burglary to which you were sentenced to 22 months’ imprisonment.  You were last discharged from prison in January 2011 and within two months of your discharge you committed this burglary offence. 

7.Mr Cheung has submitted that this is not the worst kind of robbery and asked me to start at the usual starting point for commercial premises.  The usual starting point for commercial premises is two and a half years. 

8.An aggravating factor in this case is the number of previous offences which you have of dishonesty.  This is the third time you have committed a burglary offence and the twelfth time you have committed an offence related to dishonesty. 

9.In those circumstances I consider a higher starting point to be appropriate.  In the circumstances, defendant you shall be sentenced to 32 months’ imprisonment.