R. v. YIU YIU

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1996, No. 287
(Criminal)

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

Mayo, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against the total of 34 months imprisonment imposed upon him for one count of going equipped for stealing, one count of burglary and for remaining in Hong Kong without the permission of the Director of Immigration. It would appear from the papers before us that the applicant was convicted after trial on the first two counts and on his own plea on the last count.

2. In the early hours of the morning of 22 December 1995 the applicant was seen climbing outside premises at Clayne Estate in Tsuen Wan. A report was made to the police. Police officers very soon thereafter attended at the premises where the applicant was seen on the balcony that was on the 2nd floor. He endeavoured without success to evade capture. While doing so one of the police officers saw him remove gloves he was wearing and throw something into the flower bed outside the building. When he was eventually apprehended he admitted having sneaked into Hong Kong two days previously. One of the police officers went to the said flower bed and found a pair of gloves and a pair of pliers.

3. After the applicant was taken back to the police station an imprint of his fingerprints was taken. It then became apparent that his fingerprint impression matched the impression of fingerprints which had been lifted after a burglary had been reported to the police on 19 November 1995. The flat the subject of that burglary had been ransacked and $1,850 were found by the victim to have been missing. Police records indicated that the applicant had been returned to China on 22 November 1995.

4. Her Hon. Judge Wong imposed sentences of 15 months imprisonment for illegally staying in Hong Kong, 18 months for going equipped for stealing and 21/2 years for the burglary. Part of these sentences were ordered to be served concurrently.

5. In his grounds of appeal the applicant simply states that he considers that the sentence is "too heavy".

6. Before us he said that his family in China had difficulties. He also said that there is no one now to look after his parents and that his mother was ill.

7. That does not provide a reason for us to interfere with the sentences which were imposed.

8. The sentences were neither excessive nor wrong in principle and this application is dismissed.