Case Document

100%

DCCC 107/2015

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 107 OF 2015

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

	HKSAR
	v
	Wong Kam-sing

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

Before:

HH Judge Woodcock

Date:

23 March 2015 at 3.45 pm

Present:	Miss Lily Yip, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
	Miss Lee Po-yee Polly, of John Ho & Tsui, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant

Offence:

Robbery (搶劫罪)

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of robbery contrary to Section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210.

2.The facts are that on 6 February 2013, you and a wanted person confronted the victim in a public toilet in Tsuen Wan in the early hours of the morning, at about 5:30 am.

3.He was confronted by both of you. Both of you punched him and kicked him; there was a struggle. He ended up on the ground.

4.You took his mobile phone, an iPhone 5 worth over $5,600, and the wanted person took his wallet. Both of you fled.

5.The police were informed and within 10 to 15 minutes, you were stopped by police officers. On your person, the police found the victim’s mobile phone. Under caution, you admitted the offence.

6.At a subsequent formal identification parade, the victim identified you as one of the robbers.

7.You were granted bail and due to appear in court on 6 March of the same year. However, according to the immigration records, you absconded and left Hong Kong the day before, 5 March.

8.At the time of the offence, you were 17 years and 8 months old, and according to the information supplied, you had only been released from a detention centre order 6 months prior to this offence.

9.By the age of 17 years and 8 months old, you had seven convictions over three court appearances. Those convictions include shop theft, criminal damage, arson, tempering with a motor vehicle, unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 16, and breach of a probation order.

10.The courts have imposed in the past probation orders, bindover orders and a detention centre order.

11.For this offence, you were arrested again on 18 November 2014, about 20 months after you absconded. It is significant that although immigration records show you left Hong Kong on 5 March 2013, there is no record of you returning legally through immigration to Hong Kong. Your re-arrest was only possible because you were, on that date, 18 November, arrested for another offence, possession of an offensive weapon.

12.So not only have you absconded from this offence, you have been arrested for another offence.

13.Defence counsel on your behalf has asked the court to consider a background report. However, I am of the view that that is not necessary in this case. I have significant information from defence counsel, and with such a background and a serious offence, a term of imprisonment is inevitable.

14.I have been told you were born in Hong Kong. You are now 19 years old. You left school when you completed Form 1. You have blamed bad peers or bad peer influence for your unlawful behaviour.

15.Your family, despite the aggravation I am sure they have suffered caused by your behaviour, continue to support you. I have a letter from your mother asking for leniency. She is convinced that you are remorseful.

16.I have a letter from yourself expressing your own remorse, promising that you will turn over a new leaf, expressing your shame at disappointing your family, and lastly, expressed that you are determined to make amends.

17.There are facts of this case that are relevant to sentencing. The appropriate sentence will depend on each individual set of facts and circumstances of the robbery committed.

18.There is no tariff guidelines for unarmed robberies. What is noteworthy are the following facts.

19.The robbery was premeditated, it was planned. You frankly told the police that you and your friend, the wanted person, had spotted the victim earlier and waited until he was alone to rob him. You and your friend had been drinking earlier on in the evening.

20.Secondly, this victim was confronted by two robbers. Two of you followed him into a public place, a public toilet and robbed him of his valuables. To be robbed is a frightening experience, but to be confronted by more than one robber exacerbates the situation.

21.Thirdly, it is noteworthy that no weapon was used to rob the victim. He was treated violently. He was punched and kicked, but luckily he did not suffer serious injury.

22.Your best mitigation is your plea of guilty today. I have considered several authorities, in particular, the following, all related to unarmed robberies. HKSAR v Ting Chiu [2003] 3 HKLRD 378, HKSAR v Lam Ka Hung CACC 294/2003, as well as HKSAR v Ku Kwok Wai CACC 14/2012.

23.In the authority of Ting Chiu, the victim was confronted by four robbers in a public place. The Court of Appeal found that the number of robbers was an aggravating factor, and found a starting point of 4 years appropriate.

24.In the authority of Lam Ka Hung, one robber used force against a female victim, he pushed her to the ground as she struggled when he tried to snatch her handbag. The Court of Appeal considered a 4 year starting point appropriate under those circumstances, but that appellant had a very poor criminal record, much worse than the defendant in this case.

25.It has been said by the Court of Appeal in the past that a 4 year starting point for an unarmed robbery is the top end of the sentencing range.

26.In the last authority, Ku Kwok Wai, I sentenced two defendants, two robbers, one who pushed the victim and snatched her mobile phone, whilst the other acted as a lookout. I took a starting point of 3 years and 3 months. Both of those defendants had clear records. The Court of Appeal upheld that starting point.

27.I accept the defendant was young when this offence was committed. He is now nearly 20. By absconding, he delayed the outcome of this case. Nonetheless, his age is a relevant consideration.

28.Defendant please stand up.

29.Having considered the authorities I have just referred to, the relevant factors I set out, mitigation put forward on your behalf including the letters I have received, and lastly the facts of this case, I find a 3 year and 6 month starting point appropriate. You have pleaded guilty and you are entitled to a discount of one-third for your plea. Therefore, after that discount, for this offence, you are sentenced to 2 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.