HKSAR v. Leung Chi Ho

DCCC 442/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 442 OF 2013

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to three charges of burglary. Those three charges are Charges 1, 3 and 4 on the indictment. The offences were committed on the 19th and 3 December 2012 and 28 February 2013 respectively. All offences were committed at Lok Wah North Estate in Kwun Tong. Each offence, however, was committed at a different building in that estate.

2.The modus operandi of your burglary was to go to the premises, knock on the door and press the doorbell.  If no one answered the door, you would then prise open the iron grille and wooden door with a crowbar and enter the premises to steal the property in the residences. 

3.In the 1st charge, you stole items which generally included jewellery to the value of $37,200.  In the 3rd charge, you also stole jewellery and a camera lens to the value of $30,000.  In the 4th charge, you stole a variety of items, including computer things which were to the value of $9,940. The total value of properties stolen was about $77,000‑odd.

4.In respect of rings you stole in the 1st charge, you had pawned those rings at a pawnshop in Kwun Tong using your own identity card.  In respect of the Charges 3 and 4, you were seen to be entering and leaving the respective buildings in the estate via the CCTV camera recording at the entrance of the buildings.  You were arrested some two months after the commission of the fourth offence on 5 March 2013.  When you were confronted with the rings which the police had seized from the pawnshop, you admitted the offence of burglary in respect to the 1st charge.

5.You were brought back to your residence and most of the items stolen from the residence in the 4th charge were recovered from your residence.  Later, under caution, you admitted all the offences.

6.Your counsel, Mr Chong Tin-chun, has mitigated fully and thoroughly on your behalf today, and I have taken into account everything that he has had to say.  You are aged 29 and have 31 previous convictions.  Seven of those offences are for dishonesty, five of which include burglary and two of theft.  Each of those burglaries and thefts includes an attempted burglary and attempted theft. 

7.Your counsel you and your girlfriend have told me that the reason for your commission of this offence was because you were unemployed for over a year and were in financial difficulties.  Your girlfriend had just given birth to your daughter in October which was the date of the first offence.  With these increased expenses and your girlfriend not working, you committed these offences.

8.In your letter to me today, you say you are remorseful.  Your girlfriend’s letter also states that despite your wrongdoings in the past, she believes now with the birth of your daughter, you will turn anew and asked me to give you one last chance.

9.Mr Chong has rightly pointed out that your record is not a good one.  You are only 29 years of age, and for much of your adult life, you have spent them behind bars.  This commenced when you were first charged with burglary all the way until your last conviction on 24 August 2011 for theft.  This record is obviously not good.  You have continuously been in trouble, the sentences passed on you have not deterred you, and the public needs to be protected from a person like you.

10.I accept, of course, that your strongest mitigating factor is your plea of guilty.  You have committed three separate burglaries here.  Your target was always the same housing estate.  You were obviously a menace to those people in that estate.  It was at a close proximity to where you lived in Ngau Tau Kok.

11.Defendant, I take into account these three offences and the principle of totality when sentencing you.  As I am sure that you have been well-advised by your counsel, Mr Chong, the tariff for burglary of domestic premises which all these premises were, is a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment had I convicted you after trial.  I cannot ignore your appalling criminal record and as an aggravating factor, I enhance that sentence by a further 6 months.   

12.Defendant, taking into account the principle of totality, had I convicted you after trial of all these offences, the appropriate sentence would have been 4 years and 6 months’ imprisonment. However, giving you full credit for your plea of guilty, that term would be reduced to 3 years’ imprisonment.

13.I will now sentence you for each offence as follows.  On Charge 1, 3, and 4, taking a starting point of 3 years 6 month and after giving you full credit for your pleas of guilty, those sentences shall be reduced to one of 2 years 4 months. 

14.As I mentioned, these are separate offences and distinct offences, and to make up the totality of 3 years, 4 months of Charge 3 and 4 months of Charge 4 is to run consecutive to Charge 1, making a total term of 3 years’ imprisonment.