HKSAR v. CHEUK SUI KEUNG

DCCC273/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 273 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to the two charges on the indictment, those being burglary, contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210, Laws of Hong Kong and possession of dangerous drugs being 0.07 grammes of a mixture containing heroin and midazolam, contrary to section 8(1)(a) and (2) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134, Laws of Hong Kong.

2.  Regarding the burglary, the summary of facts which you have agreed established that the owner of the premises, which is a metal recycling shop, returned to his shop in the early hours of 7 January of this year after the alarm had been triggered.  When he arrived, he found several bundles of electric wire which had been placed in the open area of the shop lying in the rear lane.  He then witnessed several bundles of wire being thrown out of the shop into the rear lane and saw you climbing over the rear wall of the shop.  He chased you but was unable to stop you.

3.  Several days later, indeed it was 27 January, you went back to the victimised premises in order to sell some recycled metal. The owner of the shop recognised you as being the person who had burgled his premises and he called the police.  You were eventually arrested after once again attempting to flee and upon arrest the drugs, being the subject matter of charge 2, were found on you.  Under caution, you admitted that you had burgled the premises earlier and said that the drugs were for your own consumption. 

4.  You are 33 years of age and have a number of previous convictions for both possession of dangerous drugs and theft. However, this is your first offence of burglary. 

5.  Very little has been put before me by way of mitigation, indeed the only real mitigation in this case is the fact that you have pleaded guilty to both offences and I will give you due credit for that. In sentencing you I do of course acknowledge that no actual loss was suffered by the owner of the victimised premises with regard to charge 1. 

6.  The normal starting point for burglaries of non‑domestic premises is a sentence of 2½ years’ imprisonment.  I do indeed adopt that as my starting point but will discount it by one-third to reflect your plea of guilty, coming to 20 months’ imprisonment in relation to charge 1.

7.  Although the amount of drugs involved in charge 2 is very small, this is the fifth occasion that you have been convicted of such an offence.  Accordingly, I adopt a starting point of 6 months’ imprisonment in relation to charge 2.  I will discount this by one-third to take account of your plea of guilty, coming to 4 months’ imprisonment on charge 2.  I order this sentence to run consecutively to the sentence on charge 1, coming to an overall sentence of 24 months’ imprisonment.