YEUNG SUI NA v. R.

1996, No.198
(Criminal)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

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

J U D G M E N T

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

P. Chan, J. (giving the judgment of the Court) :

1. The applicant pleaded guilty to one count of robbery and one count of remaining in Hong Kong without lawful authority. She was sentenced to two and a half years and six months respectively, both sentences to run consecutively making a total of three years. She now applies for leave to appeal against sentence.

2. The applicant is a Chinese illegal immigrant who was smuggled into Hong Kong on 28th December 1995. On the same day, she went to a unit in a Temporary Housing Area where the victim lived. She requested and was allowed to make a telephone call. This, in fact, was a surveillance visit in order to see whether there was anyone else at home. In an hour's time, the applicant came back under another pretext. This time she said she was not feeling well and needed some water. The victim complied with that request. In fact, she gave her two glasses. Inside the premises, the applicant used a fruit knife, slashed the victim's face a few times and robbed her of some jewels. She also demanded her to hand over her cash and credit cards. A struggle ensued during which she pulled the victim's hair and punched her on the head. Neighbours heard the noises and came. The applicant tried to escape. She was chased by the neighbours and the others, including the victim. She was finally apprehended in the vicinity. All stolen items were recovered. The victim sustained multiple superficial lacerations on the face and the upper limbs.

3. In sentencing the applicant the learned Judge took a serious view of the robbery. We agree with him. It was a serious robbery. The learned Judge also remarked that in a normal case, he would have given five years imprisonment. However, he considered that there was a good deal of mitigation including the applicant's age, plea, family circumstances and the totality principle. He reduced it to two and a half years for the robbery and ordered that she serve another six months for the immigration offence.

4. Before us the applicant submitted that we should give her a chance. She is 19 years of age. She said she came to Hong Kong to earn money to support her illegitimate young daughter who is deaf and dumb and her aged mother who is in her 50s. She also produced a medical chit before us which showed that her daughter was suffering from chronic bronchitis.

5. In our view, the sentences given by the learned Judge are over generous. There are clearly aggravating circumstances. The applicant played on the kindness and hospitality of the victim. She used actual force on the female victim and injured her face. According to the guidelines in Mo Kwong Sang, in a case like this, the normal sentence after trial would have been in the region of seven to eight years. We think that there are some mitigating circumstances but they are not exceptional. As to the immigration offence, we think that it is proper that it should be ordered to run consecutively with the sentence on the robbery charge. Taking everything into consideration, we take the view that a total of three years is clearly a light and lenient sentence.

6. Before the applicant proceeded with this application, we warned her if we should take the view that the application is totally without merit, she would run the risk of losing time or having her sentence increased. We are of the view that this application is totally without merit. In the circumstances, we would dismiss the application and order that there will be a loss of time of two months.