HKSAR v. WONG CHARM KIT AND ANOTHER

DCCC120/2011 & 250/2011
(Consolidated)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NOS. 120 OF 2011 AND 250 OF 2011

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Both defendants pleaded guilty to 6 and 5 charges of shop theft respectively.

2.  In most of the charges they have acted in concert to distract staff and steal valuable electronic items from shops.  These items are easy to resell for quick cash.

3.  Both defendants have appalling criminal records that are almost all related to similar offences.  The 1st defendant has 11 previous convictions that are all similar to offences of dishonesty, and when he committed the offences he has pleaded to today he was in breach of a suspended sentence imposed in 2009.  The 2nd defendant has 15 previous convictions, of which 13 are similar.  

4.  Both defendants are recidivists and can be classified as persistent offenders who have not yet been deterred by the courts.

5.  I have referred myself to two authorities, HKSAR v Chan Pui Chi, [1999] 2 HKLRD 830 and HKSAR v Tam Ka Lun, [2001] CACC327/2001. These authorities support the principle that previous convictions can constitute an aggravating factor and any starting point of a sentence can be increased to take into account this aggravating factor.

6.  The 1st defendant has been convicted of six theft charges of electrical goods which value totals $33,793.  The 2nd defendant has been convicted of five charges where the electronical goods value amount to $29,323.  Value of stolen items is significant but not the only factor when considering sentence.

7.  I have taken into account mitigation put forward for both defendants, as well as the backgrounds of both defendants.  Their guilty pleas today is their best mitigation.  I have taken into account the method; the modus operandi of the thefts which are all very similar, planned and well-organised.

8.  I would have taken a 15 months starting point for each offence, but for the fact that both defendants are persistent offenders, I will increase that starting point to 18 months for each and every charge.

9.  1st defendant, please stand up. 

10.  I have, as I repeat, taken a starting point of 18 months.  Because you have pleaded guilty, you will be entitled to a discount of 6 months on each charge.

11.  1st defendant, for Charges 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11, for each charge you will be sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment.  For Charges 6, 7, 9 and 10, of the 12 months, 2 months will be consecutive to Charge 5 and the balance concurrent.  For Charge 11, of the 12 months, 4 months will be consecutive to Charge 5.  That will make a total of 24 months.

12.  For the 2nd defendant, for each Charge 5, 6, 8, 10 and 11, you are sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment.  For Charges 6, 8 and 10, of the 12 months, 2 months will be consecutive to Charge 5 and the balance concurrent.  For the 12 months of Charge 11, 4 months will be consecutive to Charge 5 and the balance concurrent.  2nd defendant, you are sentenced to a total of 22 months.

13.  I want to explain that the 4 months consecutive from Charge 11 instead of the 2 months for the other charges is to reflect the fact the defendants committed Charge 11 whilst on court bail.  This I consider an aggravating factor.

14.  For the 1st defendant, you are in breach of a suspended sentence for Eastern Magistracy case no. 6330/2008.  I now activate that 4 months sentence.  Of those 4 months, 2 months will be concurrent to the 2 years I have imposed today, 2 months will be consecutive.

15.  1st defendant, you are sentenced today to a total of 2 years and 2 months sentence.  2nd defendant, you are sentenced to a total of 1 year and 10 months sentence.