HKSAR v. Au Shing Kwong
|
DCCC 698/2014 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 698 OF 2014 -----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
---------------------------- Reasons for Sentence ---------------------------- Charge and facts 1.The defendant pleads guilty to the burglary of a commercial premises known as “A Salon” situated at Room A, Ground Floor, Chung Nam Mansion, No. 4 Mok Cheong Street, To Kwa Wan, Kowloon. 2.A Salon opens from 10 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. every day. The staff pantry cum storeroom is situated next to the rear exit facing the rear lane between Mok Cheong Street and Ma Tau Kok Road. There is a loft which is accessible via staircases near the storeroom. The rear door is kept open during business hours. 3.At about 10 a.m. on 13 June 2014, Madam CHAN, the person-in-charge of A Salon last checked the rear exit and found nothing unusual. At about 1:00 p.m. she found a television set (valued at about $2,500) missing from the loft. The following items were also missing from the storeroom:
4.Madam CHAN reported the case immediately. Further investigation revealed Madam LI, a cleaning worker, saw a man (later identified by her in an identification parade as the Defendant) pulling a large basket containing some cooking utensils at about noon of 13 June 2014. He later borrowed a trolley from Madam LI and pushed the basket away. He returned the trolley to her about 30 minutes later. 5.CCTV camera installed at the rear lane captured the Defendant’s act of pushing a trolley loaded with a basketful of utensils including a sink leaving the rear lane and walking towards Ma Tau Kok Road; he then returned to the rear lane with an empty basket and left again with a LPG cylinder. 6.On 17 June 2014, the police arrested the Defendant when he left home with a LPG cylinder. After caution he admitted having stolen the LPG cylinder from a small shop at the rear lane near Ma Tau Kok Road and intended to resell it. 7.In the subsequent video recorded interview, he admitted under caution that he entered A Salon from the rear exit when the rear door was not locked; he stole a few things including a television set; he borrowed a trolley from a woman at the rear lane; he sold some of the stolen items in a recycle shop nearby at $200; he later returned to the rear lane and took the LPG cylinder home; he had spent all the money; he committed the offence by himself. Mitigation 8.He is now 45 years of age, of primary education level. He lives with his aged mother, who suffers hypertension. His father, who lives apart, could not walk since a year ago. He visits his father and takes care of him from time to time. He has 3 children, taken care of by their respective mothers. He is a divorce. He has 10 previous records for theft and 1 for burglary (ie entering to steal, sentenced on 20 August 2012). He is a recidivist for theft. His solicitor does not dispute that this is an aggravating factor in his sentence. Sentencing guidelines for non-domestic premises 9.In R v Wong Man [1993] 1 HKC 80, the Court of Appeal said that the proper starting point for non-domestic premises would be 2 ½ years’ imprisonment for a first offender of full age (as per Macdougall JA). Sentencing this defendant 10.I take an initial starting point of 2 ½ years. I increase it by 6 months due to his recidivism for theft. The eventual starting point is 3 years. I reduce it by one-third for his plea of guilty. The sentence is 2 years as there are no other mitigating factors.
|
Cases cited in this judgment