HKSAR v. Dela Rosa Arnulfo Siblang also known as Arnulfo Dela Rosa
|
DCCC 676/2014 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO 676 OF 2014 ----------------------
--------------------- 1.Defendant has pleaded guilty to two charges, one of loitering, contrary to section 160(3) of the Crimes Ordinance, and a second of failing to surrender to custody. 2.The 2nd charge or the first one we are dealing with today relates to the defendant loitering within a building in Whampoa Street in Hunghom, particularly inside an unoccupied flat, causing a local resident to feel concerned for his safety or well-being. 3.The other charge, the bail charge, relates to him failing to answer to bail. He failed to attend court on 24 September when a warrant was issued. 4.As far as the defendant’s background is concerned, he has a number of previous convictions, six occasions appeared in court in total. He has been placed on probation, sent to a drug addiction treatment centre in 2005 and placed on suspended sentence in 2011, custodial sentence in 2014 and is at present subject to a suspended sentence for breach of condition of stay. 5.I wanted to see if the defendant was still a drug dependent. There is a report from a drug addiction treatment centre telling me that the defendant is no longer a drug dependent. The report also shows he is 38 years old. He was born in the Philippines. He has lived in the Philippines and Hong Kong. He became a drug addict in around 2005 but appeared to no longer be a dependent. 6.In the defendant’s favour, he has pleaded guilty and, as I say, he appears to be free of his dependency at this point. 7.I will turn to sentence. On the 2nd charge that he faces in this indictment, the loitering charge, I am going to take a starting point of 6 months’ imprisonment, reduce that to 4 months’ imprisonment for his plea of guilty. On the charge of failing to surrender to custody, I take a starting point of 3 months’ imprisonment and reduce that to 2 months’ imprisonment for the plea of guilty. 8.The offences are separate and independent. So I order that they be served consecutively. That is a total of 6 months’ imprisonment. 9.Yes, and I formally dismiss Charge 1 if I have not done it already. I am just telling that Charge 1 that he faces is formally dismissed. (Discussion re suspended sentence) 10.Suspended sentence is not activated. My reason for doing that is that the offences are dissimilar. So I will leave it in force as it would not be in the interest of justice to enact that sentence at this stage.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||