R. v. HO DING PANG

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1996, NO. 710
(Criminal)

______________

______________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

Wong, J. (giving the judgment of the Court)

1. The Applicant pleaded guilty before Judge McMahon in the District Court to three offences: 1) driving without a valid driving licence; 2) using a motor vehicle without third party insurance; and 3) using a forged Hong Kong identity card. On the first and second charges the judge sentenced him to 6 months imprisonment on each charge to be served concurrently and ordered him to be disqualified from driving for a period of three years. On the third charge, he was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment to be served consecutively to the sentence of 6 months imposed on charges 1 and 2, making a total sentence of 21 months. He now seeks leave to appeal against the sentences of imprisonment.

2. Mr. Suffiad who appeared for the Applicant before us argued that the sentence of 15 months imposed on charge 3 was excessive and it should either be made concurrent to the other sentences imposed on the traffic offences, or alternatively that sentence should be reduced to result in a lighter sentence for the Applicant.

3. We do not agree. The judge was right to order the sentence of 15 months to run consecutively.

4. The Applicant was intercepted by the police after he had parked and alighted from a light goods vehicle. On demand, he produced a Hong Kong identity card to the officer and a driving licence, all of which were in the name of Wong Kin Pui. The identity card was forged while the driving licence was borrowed from Wong Kin Pui. The Applicant was disqualified from driving when he was stopped and arrested for the present offence. In fact, he had 8 pervious convictions for driving whilst disqualified and this is his 9th conviction. He was also at the time undergoing detention in a drug addiction treatement centre.

5. The Applicant knew that the identity card was forged. He intended to use it if and when necessary. The purpose was to deceive police officers that he was entitled and qualified to drive whilst he was not, thereby avoiding arrest when he was stopped whilst committing the offence of driving whilst disqualified.

6. His conduct is utterly disgraceful. His pervious record clearly shows that he is a persistent and completely unrepentant offender. He has no respect for the law whatsoever. He had been given numerous chances.

7. This is a serious matter and having regard to the particular facts, we are satisfied that the overall sentence is justified. The judge could have imposed a longer sentence on the traffic offences in view of the Applicant's appalling record and a shorter sentence for the forged identity card. But whichever way he approaches it, it will make no difference to the totality.

8. The application is refused.