HKSAR v. Ade Mulyawan

DCCC 288/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 288 OF 2013

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.This is an unarmed-robbery case. The defendant is a middle-aged Indonesian man. Whilst he was in Hong Kong as a visitor, he committed the present offence.

2.The defendant pleaded guilty before me to one count of robbery.  The prosecution case is that an Indonesian lady was doing some shopping in a shopping arcade in Chai Wan in the afternoon on the day of offence.  She was pushing a pram with a two-year-old baby girl sitting in it. She placed her wallet in the back pocket of the pram.  She stopped by a vegetable stall where she was being pushed from behind by the defendant.  Having regained her balance, she immediately turned around and grabbed the defendant who, having got hold of her wallet, was then trying to flee.  A struggle ensued, and the defendant was eventually subdued by some passers-by, and the victim’s wallet was recovered.

3.The defendant, aged 43, a person of previous good character. The court was told he came here as a visitor on 11 February.  About a week later, he committed the present offence due to the fact that he ran out of money, as a result of which he committed the offence in order to get money to go back to Indonesia.  He is a married man with two children: a boy and a girl aged 10 and 15 respectively.  Both of them are at school.

4.It is submitted by the defence counsel that this robbery is not the worst kind: no weapon used and it involved the minimal amount of force. 

5.I had the opportunity to read through the case of Ku Kwok Wai CACC 14 of 2012, the facts of which are very similar to the present case except that in the present case, the defendant acted alone while in Ku’s case, there was an accomplice.  In Ku’s case, the defendant, who pleaded guilty, was given 2 years and 2 months for the robbery.  It went on to appeal but it was dismissed.

6.I accept that the present case is not the worst kind of robbery, and it could be said it comes down to the very lower end of the scale of seriousness.  Given the facts of the present case, taking into account all the mitigation put forward and in particular the case of Ku, I take 3 years as starting point, reduce to 2 years to reflect your plea, and I see nothing to reduce the sentence any further.  The fact that you are a person of previous good character does not carry much weight because the time you spent in Hong Kong is so short.  In the end, you are sentenced to 2 years’ imprisonment.