HKSAR v. Leung Tsz Fung, Ringo

DCCC 513/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 513 OF 2013

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant has pleaded guilty to three charges of burglary, contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210.

2.Of the three premises, two were office premises and one was a domestic premise.  All premises were in the same building in Portland Street, Mong Kok.  In fact, the defendant himself lived in the same building.  I have been told that the defendant rented premises in that building in February 2012.  All three charges were committed in February 2013.

3.I have been told in mitigation that the defendant was released from his last term of imprisonment just prior to signing a lease for an apartment in this building.  The defendant in order to rent a premise and get himself on his feet had borrowed some money.  After borrowing some money and signing a lease, he managed to find full-time employment and was in fact working hard and leading a law-abiding life until health issues caused him to resign from a physical job as a personal trainer in a gym.

4.I have seen doctors’ notes documenting the defendant’s history of health issues that led him to resign.  He had to resign in November 2012.  This led to financial difficulty as he had debts and rent to pay.  Not long after that he was chased for repayment whereupon he became desperate and burgled these premises over the course of Chinese New Year or thereabouts.

5.Where the offices were concerned, he knew they would be empty over the Chinese New Year period.  Clearly, he took what he could find of value including cash, tools, computers, televisions and documentation.  Some items were recovered when the defendant’s home was searched after his arrest.

6.The victim’s loss can be described as significant but not substantial. 

7.The defendant is not a man of clear record.  He has six previous convictions of which one is similar, and in 2011 he was sentenced to 14 months’ imprisonment for two burglary offences.

8.I have heard full mitigation and everything that can be said on behalf of the defendant has been said. 

9.The defendant is 39 years old, separated from his wife.  He does have a 12-year-old daughter who lives with her mother and that daughter is born from the defendant’s ex-girlfriend.  The defendant has regular contact with his daughter. 

10.I accept the defendant did try to live a law-abiding life, but his health let him down.  With a physical job such as personal training, health issues would lead to him being unable to fulfil that employment. As a result, I accept he encountered financial difficulty due to his resignation and then committed these offences.

11.His plea of guilty is his best mitigation today.  The usual and normal starting point for a burglary of a non-domestic premise is 2½ years’ imprisonment and for a domestic premise, 3 years’ imprisonment, and that is only in the absence of aggravating or mitigating factors.

12.Even though this is the defendant’s second conviction for burglary, I accept there are no aggravating factors here.

13.Yes, defendant, please stand up.  After considering the facts of the charges, the loss suffered by victims, mitigation, background and explanation put forward by the defendant as well as the guidelines I have just referred to, I take a starting point of 2 years and 6 months for Charges 1 and 3.  I take a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment for Charge 4. 

14.The defendant is entitled to a discount of one-third for his plea today.  Accordingly, for Charge 1, I impose a sentence of 1 year and 8 months.  Similarly, for Charge 3, I impose a term of imprisonment of 1 year and 8 months.  For Charge 4, I impose a term of imprisonment of 2 years. 

15.I do take into account the totality principle and the fact that the three offences were committed days apart.  Therefore, I order 3 months of Charge 1 as well as 3 months of Charge 3 to be served consecutively to Charge 4, and the balance of those sentences to be served concurrently.  The total sentence is 2 years and 6 months.