HKSAR v. Wong Ho Yan

DCCC 1158/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1158 OF 2013

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.On 4 February, the defendant pleaded guilty to this indictment, which contains one charge of robbery.

2.He admitted the facts and I have convicted him.

3.Following the details of the defendant’s antecedents, I have obtained reports upon him (that is, a background report and a training centre report) because the defendant is only 19 years of age at this point.

4.The facts that the defendant admitted support the conviction and show that on 28 October at around 1.30 am, the first prosecution witness went out jogging in Sham Shui Po.  The witness had a mobile phone in his hand and the defendant, together with another person, approached the witness and assaulted him.  It was an assault that involved the use of fists and kicks and also the bumping of the witness’ head on a wall for five to six times.  The defendant seized the phone and fled with it.

5.The defendant was eventually apprehended and he said under caution he had no money to spend so he robbed the phone; he intended to sell it.

6.The facts were admitted, these advances admitted, and I convicted the defendant accordingly.

7.Fortunately, the victim does not seem to have received any ongoing injury.

8.After conviction, the defendant’s antecedents were put forward.  It shows he is a person of clear record, aged, 19 years old, and which made him eligible for the programmes run by the Correctional Services Department for people between the ages of 14 and 21.

9.I obtained a background report and a training centre report on the defendant.

10.The background report showed the defendant came from what is described as a broken family without adequate parental guidance. Under adverse influence of undesirable peers, he lost interest in his studies and was playful.  He was seeking fast  money, apparently, as a result from this offence.  It noted that  his mother has been supportive of him since his conviction and his remand in custody. 

11.According to the training centre report, the defendant is fit for detention in a training centre.  There is a place available for him.  The training centre report is similar to the background report.  It considered the defendant needs to develop more insight into his misdeeds and considered disciplinary training with statutory(?) supervision would be beneficial.

12.Now, I have to consider what is the appropriate disposal for this defendant.  He has committed a serious offence:  an unarmed robbery committed together with another, in concert with another, where violence was used, including the application of force to the head.  Even a young man such as himself could expect a sentence for starting point for a person with a clear record in the region of 4 years’ imprisonment for this offence.

13.However, the defendant is still very young.  He is suitable for a training centre disposal.  This is his first offence and he has good family support; his mother supports him.  So, one could still be optimistic about a sentence that involved an element of rehabilitation.

14.Also, when one considers the deduction for plea of guilty and any remission on a prison sentence, the eventual period of incarceration may not be much different between a training centre disposal and a sentence of imprisonment.

15.I consider a rehabilitative sentence is the appropriate sentence for this young man, so I will accordingly sentence him to training centre for this offence.