Case Document

100%

DCCC 329/2015

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 329 OF 2015

____________

	HKSAR
	v
	PHAN NANG MINH
	ALSO KNOWN AS PUN NANG MING

____________

Before:

HH Judge Dufton

Date:

16 June 2015

Present:

Ms Fontaine Lai, PP, of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR.
Mr Jackson Ho of Jackson Ho & Co assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant.

Offence:

Theft (盜竊罪)

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.Phan Nang Minh you have pleaded guilty to one charge of theft, contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Chapter 210.

2.The theft is one of pickpocketing. In summary at around 5.40 p.m. on the 26 March this year the police were patrolling in Cameron Road in Tsim Sha Tsui when they noticed you paying attention to the passersby. The police followed you to the staircase of the footbridge at the junction of Granville Road and Chatham Road South.

3.Whilst at the staircase you paid attention to two passersby walking down the staircase. You then followed the passersby. As they crossed Granville Road you followed close behind and used your right hand to take a mobile phone from the pocket of one of the passersby. The police immediately intercepted and arrested you.

4.In passing sentence I have carefully considered everything said on your behalf by Mr Ho including that you have a wife and young child in Vietnam.

5.In HKSAR v Ngo Van Huy[2005] 2 HKLRD 1 as applied in HKSAR v Duong Van Dung & others CACC 284/2004 the Court of Appeal confirmed the guideline sentence for pickpocketing after trial is 12 to 15 months imprisonment for a first offender, where there are no aggravating features. I am satisfied the theft being of a mobile phone a starting point after trial of 15 months imprisonment is appropriate (see for example HKSAR v Liu Lin Feng CACC 206/2011).

6.Aggravating features include where the offence is committed in a place in which the public is at particular risk, such as areas where the pedestrian traffic is heavy. Tsim Sha Tsui is a well known crowded area and no doubt this was why you went there. However the facts reveal that at the time you took the mobile phone the pedestrian flow was light. In these circumstances I do not consider on this occasion that the location is a matter in aggravation of the starting point (see HKSAR v Ganbold Munkh Erdene & another [2015] 1 HKLRD 999).

7.The fact an accused is a persistent offender is an aggravating feature. You have previously appeared in court on 30 occasions amassing a total of 38 convictions with 27 for theft or attempted theft. Thirteen are specifically stated to be pickpocketing. The offence in 2012 was also pickpocketing. On that occasion I imposed a sentence of 20 months imprisonment.

8.Your last appearance in court was on the 18 February 2014 when you were sentenced to 22 months imprisonment for pickpocketing. You were released from that sentence on the 18 February this year and committed the present offence just over five weeks later.

9.By reason of your persistent offending and the commission of the offence just over one month after your release from prison, I am satisfied the starting point is to be increased by 12 months to 27 months imprisonment (see HKSAR v Tsui Chiu Kwai CACC 452/2011).

10.Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty you are convicted and sentenced to1 year and 6 months imprisonment.