HKSAR v. HUNG KWUN FUK

DCCC 260/2018

[2018] HKDC 931

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 260 OF 2018

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of “Burglary”, contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210.

Facts

2.  At about 11:45am on 15 October 2016, Mr Ho and Ms Law left their home at Flat G, 1^st Floor, Ka Shing Lau, Ka Wai Chuen, Hung Hom with their daughter.  The kitchen window was locked.

3.  When Mr Ho returned to the flat at about 11:00pm on the same day, he found the kitchen window open and the window grille on the floor. 

4.  Upon checking, the properties particularized in the charge were found missing.  The total value of the properties is HK$74,538 and 1,305 Euro.

5.  Two cans of soft drink were consumed and left in the kitchen area.  Subsequent examination confirmed that the defendant’s DNA was found on the two soft drink cans.

Mitigation

6.  The defendant is aged 42, single. He has 30 criminal conviction records, 24 relate to burglary and one relates to theft.  He previously worked and earned about HK$15,000 per month before his detention.  In mitigation, it was submitted that the defendant managed to stay out of trouble for 10 years since 2007.  The defence referred to two cases[1] and submitted the starting point should be 3 years’ imprisonment.  The court was urged to impose lenient sentence on the defendant.

Sentence

7.  There is a well settled sentencing guideline for burglary of domestic premises.  According to the guideline, the starting point for a single burglary of domestic premises committed by a first offender of full age where there are no aggravating or mitigating features is 3 years’ imprisonment.

8.  As far as the defendant’s previous conviction records are concerned, whilst he had 24 previous convictions for burglary, most of them were in 1995.  The defendant had managed to stay out of trouble for 10 years and his last conviction was for attempt burglary in 2017. In the circumstances, I will not enhance the starting point solely because of the defendant’s previous conviction records.

9.  As there is no aggravating feature in the commission of the offence and the burgled flat is a residential premises, the appropriate starting point is 3 years’ imprisonment.  Given the defendant’s plea, the sentence is reduced to 2 years’ imprisonment.  Apart from that, I do not see other mitigating factor justifying further reduction of sentence.  The defendant is therefore sentenced to 2 years’ imprisonment.