HKSAR v. Kwan Shiu Chung

DCCC463/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 463 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

The charge

1.The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of burglary.  Such offence is contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210.

Facts of the case

2.The facts of the case are summarized as follows. PW1 runs a decoration business.  He rented Shop no. 8, Ground Floor, Kowloon Investments Company Limited Factory Building, Nos. 2-10 Bute Street, Mong Kok, Kowloon, (“the Shop”), for storing some of his decoration machines and tools. At the material time the entrance of the Shop was secured by some wooden boards and an iron chain with two padlocks.     

3.At about 5.45 pm, on 24 March 2012, a security guard, PW2, saw the defendant wandering outside the Shop suspiciously.  He then kept the Shop under observation through CCTV.  At 6.25 pm the defendant was seen breaking into the Shop. 

4.When the police arrived, they saw the defendant was inside the Shop.  At the time he has a roll of electric wires in his hand and was pushing a trolley with some decoration machines, tools and air conditioners on it.  The defendant attempted to flee but was subdued and arrested inside the Shop.  The police found a pair of pliers inside the Shop.

5.Under caution the defendant admitted that his father has just passed away and he was in urgent need of money.  As he knew that the Shop contained some decoration tools, he therefore broke into the Shop by cutting the iron chain at the entrance with a pair of pliers. He intended to steal electric wires, air-conditioners and decoration tools from the Shop. 

Background of the defendant and mitigation

6.The defendant, aged 53, was unemployed at the time of arrest.  He has 17 previous convictions involving some 34 offences.  Most of these offences were dishonesty related, six of which were burglary.  He had been in and out of prison on numerous occasions on terms ranging from 2 months to 34 months.  His last conviction was adjudged on 30 December 2009 whereby a suspended sentence of imprisonment was imposed on him on a theft charge. Nevertheless, within three months of the expiration of the suspension period he committed this offence. 

7.The defendant can be considered as a habitual offender.  He has never learned any lesson from his past misdeeds, nor has he treasured the opportunities given by the court.  From his past appalling convictions, one could see that the defendant was lacking determination to start anew.  This time he was merely using the medical condition of his late father and his aged mother as excuses to go back to his vice of committing crimes.  This court sees no remorse from him except his guilty plea. 

Sentencing guidelines

8.The Court of Appeal, in R v Wong Man [1993] 1 HKC 80, laid down general guideline of sentence for non-domestic burglary after trial.  It was held that 2½ years was the proper starting point for a frist offender of full age in non-domestic burglary.  This offence was committed in the evening at a factory building.  Equipment was used to break into the premises.  This is the fourth time that the defendant was convicted of a burglary charge in the District Court. 

Sentence

9.Having fully considered the background of the case, and that of the defendant, mitigation advanced by the defence lawyer and the sentencing guideline, this court considers a starting point of sentence of 3 years' imprisonment to be appropriate in this case.  Such sentence is reduced by one-third, by reason of the defendant’s guilty plea, to 2 years' imprisonment.

10.This court now orders a 2 years' imprisonment to be imposed on the defendant.