THE QUEEN v. OR HON-FONG

____________________________________

BETWEEN

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

JUDGMENT

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

1. This is an appeal on sentence. The appellant is aged 37 pleaded guilty to a charge of wounding and was sentenced to 15 months.

2. The appellant and 3 others (including 'the victim') were playing mahjong - a dispute arose between the appellant and the victim over the rules of mahjong. The victim picked up a folding chair and it is an agreed fact that this was 'for defence'. The agreed facts do not support the contention that the appellant threatened the victim. The appellant and the victim were separated.

3. The appellant then rushed into the kitchen, picked up a chopper and came back and struck the victim once on his back, causing a wound which required 6 stitches. He was not hospitalized.

4. The appellant before the magistrate contended through his counsel that he had lost control of himself, that there was a degree of provocation and that the blow was only delivered after a further challenge from the victim.

5. The magistrate described the chopper used as a 'fearsome weapon'. He noted the blow was to the victim's back. The magistrate gave the appellant credit for being a first offender, for the fact that he had pleaded guilty and that he had acted on the spur of the moment. He did not think the suggestion of provocation carried much weight but he kept it in mind. He thought the appellant was basically a decent hard working man. The appellant and the victim were friends. I was informed that the victim was in court and wanted to ask for leniency for the appellant.

In the circumstances of this case, I allow the appeal end substitute therefore a sentence of 9 months.