|
DCCC 970/2024
[2025] HKDC 1250
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO 970 OF 2024
--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
| Before: |
Deputy District Judge M Chow in Court (Open to Public) |
| Present: |
Mr Ko Tsun Kiu, Frankie, Public Prosecutor for HKSAR/Director of Public Prosecutions |
|
Ms Ma Cho Yuh, Judy, instructed by Stephen Lo & P Y Tse, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant |
--------------------------------------
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
--------------------------------------
1. The Defendant pleaded guilty to 2 charges of burglary of the same shop on 2 different days:-
(a) Charge 1: on 5 June 2024 - stolen property was $2,000 cash
(b) Charge 2: on 7 June 2024 - nothing was stolen
2. The premises was a food company, every day at about 3 am, vegetables would be delivered to the entrance of the shop.
3. PW1 was the person in charge of the shop. When he left the shop, he pulled the roller shutter down, but did not lock the shutter as it did not work.
4. On 6 June 2024, PW1 was informed by his colleague that $2,000 in metal container and the red bucket had gone missing.
5. CCTV captured the Defendant lifting the roller shutter at 22:08:49 and left the shop at 22:09:33.
6. As to Charge 2, PW1 did not leave any cash inside the shop and did not lock the roller shutter. At about 10:53 pm, the police found the Defendant was wandering outside the shop before lifting the roller shutter and entered the shop. Ten seconds later, the Defendant left the shop and was subsequently arrested by the police.
7. Under caution, the Defendant said that he delivered vegetables to the shop and knew the roller shutter was unlocked, he went in to steal in both occasions.
Criminal record
8. The Defendant has 4 criminal convictions between 1999 to 2006. None of them are related to the present charges.
Mitigation/Background
9. The Defendant is 53 years of age. His wife and daughter[1] are both living in China. His wife suffered from depression since his detention for the present offences.
10. The Defendant lives with his parents[2] in a public housing estate. They are in poor health.
11. The whole family rely on the Defendant for financial support.
12. He was previously a fireman, but was injured in a car accident in 2012. As a result of which, he suffered from vertebrae dislocation and was unable to carry out heavy duty work.
13. He then has his early retirement in 2014.
14. He has been awarded for Certificate of Commendation on two occasions:-
(a) in 1993 - the China Airline Flight incident (華航客機墮海事件); and
(b) in 1996 – the Garley Building Fire (嘉利大廈火災).
15. He also joined the 深水埗關愛隊 set up by the government. In 2008, he donated $110,000 to the charity group in the Sichuan earthquake incident.
16. At the time of committing the present offences, he was unemployed. He was previously a delivery worker earning about $20,000 per month and worked in the supermarket as a part time worker earning $15,000 per month.
17. In March, 2024, he was diagnosed to have a benign tumor in his brain. There was an operation in November 2024 to remove the tumor. He has recovered from the operation.
18. The Defendant’s last conviction was in 2006.
Sentence
19. This is a non-domestic premises burglary, the usual sentence is 30 months. I take 30 months as the starting point, given 1/3 discount, the sentences for each charge comes down to 20 months.
20. In the case of HKSAR v Lau Hiu Man[3], the appellant re-entered the same unit to steal. The Court said that :-
“the burglaries were separate and distinct. the second offence added to the culpability of the first and it was not improper to regard this as justifying and additional period of imprisonment for the first burglary,”
21. As such, in arriving a just and proper sentence to reflect the culpability of the offences, I order 4 months from Charge 2 to run consecutively to Charge 1 as the owner did not suffer any financial lost in Charge 2.
22. The final sentence is one of 24 months’ imprisonment[4].
Further deduction?
23. I notice in mitigation that the Defendant has received 2 commendations during his services in the Fire Services Department. He also has participated in charity works. But there is no documents to support his claim. As such, I do not attach weight to this assertion and the Defendant is not entitled to any further deduction.
Order
24. The Defendant is ordered to be served a period of 24 months’ imprisonment.
|
( M Chow )
Deputy District Judge |
[1] 8 years old
[2] 85 years old and 83 years old
[3] [2013] 2 HKLRD 862
[4] 20 months (Charge 1) + 4 months (Charge 2)
|