|
DCCC 1168/2021 & 373/2022 (Consolidated)
[2022] HKDC 1083
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO 1168 OF 2021 AND
CRIMINAL CASE NO 373 OF 2022 (CONSOLDATED)
________________________
________________________
| Present: |
Mr. Lee Yiu Chung, Counsel on Fiat, for HKSAR |
| |
Mr. Tien Kei Rui, instructed by M/s Chan & Ho, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant |
| Offence: |
[1] – [3] Burglary (入屋犯法罪) |
________________________
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
________________________
Charges
1. The Defendant pleads guilty to 3 counts of burglary.
Facts
2. Upon arrest of the Defendant for Charge 2 on 14 July 2021, it was discovered that he had committed Charge 1 on 13 July 2021.
3. At about 9 p.m. on 13 July 2021, he entered a room (“LB-1”) in the basement of the Cultural Centre in Tsim Sha Tsui where he stole 2 reels of electric cables (valued at $2,500). He also stole a trolley nearby to move the electric cables. CCTV had captured his presence. A shirt resembling his in the act was seized from his residence by the police. He admitted stealing the electric cables and the trolley, which he sold for $200 and several tens of dollars respectively. These relate to Charge 1.
4. At about 5 p.m. on 14 July 2021, the staff in the Cultural Centre locked the door of LB-1 before getting off work. Among others, there were some copper wires (valued at $4,000) inside. Before 9 p.m. on 14 July 2021 the police in ambush saw him passing through the parking lot empty-handed towards LB-1. He entered the room and stole some copper wires. He also stole a bicycle outside the room. He was intercepted on the street by the police. He admitted stealing the copper wires and the bicycle. He intended to sell the copper wires and keep the bicycle for his own use. CCTV had captured his presence. These relate to Charge 2.
5. In the small hours on 8 August 2021, the police saw him furtively enter a factory building. While on ambush outside the building, the police intercepted him as he left the building. A pair of pliers (valued at $80) was found in his pant pocket. He admitted stealing it from a table on the first floor of the building. CCTV had captured his presence. These relate to Charge 3.
Mitigation
6. The Defendant is 47 years of age. He was educated up to F. 4 level in Hong Kong. He lived with his brother. He had a lot of criminal records, including 9 for theft (sentenced in 2014 – 2018), 1 for going equipped for stealing (sentenced in 2015), and 1 for burglary (sentenced in 2015). His last record for theft had him jailed for 4 months in 2018, which was 3 years before the present offence. His repeat theft –related records demonstrate the insufficient deterrence for theft-related offences, such as burglary, the subject-matter of today. This shall be an aggravating factor in his sentence.
7. As he committed Charge 3 whilst on police bail for Charges 1 and 2, this shall be an aggravating factor in his sentence Charge 3.
Sentencing considerations
8. In R v Wong Man [1993] 1 HKC 215, the Court of Appeal’s sentencing guidelines state that the proper starting point for non-domestic premises shall be 2 years 6 months’ imprisonment for a first offender of full age, subject to aggravating factors. This is the case for Charge 2 here.
9. The guidelines are not applicable to opportunistic burglary (HKSAR v Sim Ka wing CACC 450/2000). This is the case for Charges 1 and 3 here.
Sentencing the Defendant
10. For Charge 1, the starting point is 24 months on the facts. It is aggravated by 3 months due to his repeat records for theft-related offences. The actual starting point is 27 months. After the one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 18 months.
11. For Charge 2, the starting point is 30 months on the facts. It is aggravated by 3 months due to his repeat records for theft-related offences. The actual starting point is 33 months. After the one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 22 months.
12. For Charge 3, the starting point is 24 months on the facts. It is aggravated by 3 months due to his repeat records for theft-related offences and another 3 months due to his committing it whilst on police bail for the first and second burglaries. The actual starting point is 30 months. After the one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 20 months.
13. I consider the totality principle and order all sentences to be served concurrently. The total sentence is 22 months.
|