HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN HO

DCCC 323/2014

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 323 OF 2014

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Robbery". He and 4 other persons robbed a female staff member of a foreign exchange company over HK$190,000 cash in total as well as her personal properties.

Summary of Facts

2. Madam Francisco (PW1) worked as a cashier for Jargon Foreign Exchange ("Jargon").  Jargon has 5 branches located in Tsim Sha Tsui.  On 15 December 2013, PW1 was assigned to operate the branch at Kimberly Road.

3. About 8:00 am on the same day, PW1 went to the branch at Peninsula Centre.  She took cash in the sums of HK$158,384.70 and RMB23,124 and put them in a black shoulder bag to be taken to the branch at Kimberly Road.

4. On her way to Kimberly Road, PW1 carried the black shoulder bag (which contained all the cash) on her left shoulder.  She also carried a hangbag (valued at $5,000) containing (a) 1 iPhone (valued at $5,000); (b) 1 mobile phone; (c) 1 purse (valued at $900) which contained cash in the sum of $7,000; (d) 1 HKID card; and (e) 1 Hang Seng Bank Card.

5. When PW1 reached the 7-11 Store situated at Ground Floor, No.29 Cameron Road ("the Store"), a male grabbed her neck from behind and pulled her into the rear lane next to the Store.  A male then punched her right forehead and her right parietal region many times.  When she fell onto the ground, the male took away her black shoulder bag and handbag (including their contents) and fled towards Granville Road.

6. PW1 sustained these injuries:  tenderness on lips (bilateral); tenderness on right parietal region; haemotoma on right parietal region; and abrasion on left foot.

7. The defendant was arrested on 7 February 2014.  In his video recorded interviews, the defendant admitted having committed the robbery on 15 December 2013 together with someone named TANG and 3 Pakistani males.  He denied being the mastermind, but described his role and the role of each accomplice.  He also admitted having received $17,000 as a reward for the robbery.

Mitigation & Sentence

8. The defendant is 20 and has a clear record.  Defence counsel Ms. CHEUNG informed me that the defendant was born in the mainland.  He was separated from his father when he was little.  His maternal grandparents looked after him.  He moved to Hong Kong at the age of 10. 

9. The defendant's mother later re-married, but he did not get along well with his stepfather.  After completing F.3, the defendant began to take up casual jobs.  His mother then decided to send him to the mainland for vocational training.  He acquired the qualification of intermediate level electrician.

10. Ms. CHEUNG submitted that when the defendant returned to Hong Kong, he worked in a karaoke and performed well. Unfortunately, he mixed with some undesirable peers and lost interest in work.  At the time of the offence, the defendant was out of work and had no income.  He was living with TANG and TANG suggested to rob.  Ms. CHEUNG stressed that the defendant was not the mastermind and did not know how TANG got the Pakistani males involved.

11. Finally, Ms. CHEUNG submitted that the defendant fully cooperated with the Police.  Based on the present evidence, no charge could have been laid against him without his own admissions.  A bundle of mitigation documents was placed before me; their contents are duly noted.

12. Time after time, the court has expressed in very clear terms that being in financial difficulty (however serious) is no mitigating factor for committing a crime.  A clear message must be conveyed to the general public that robbery is a dead serious crime and that the offenders would most certainly be punished by long-term imprisonment.

13. According to the Court of Appeal's decision in HKSAR v ON Ling CACC 386/2004, the present case should not be regarded as an armed robbery; the sentencing guidelines stipulated in MO Kwong-sang v The Queen [1981] HKLR 160 are thus not appropriate. On the other hand, the defendant acted in concert with 4 other accomplices with an orchestrated plan (at least he knew about it and played a vital part, even though he might not have involved in planning the robbery). Furthermore, PW1 was attacked and her injuries were by no means minor. The monetary loss suffered by both Jargon and PW1 was also substantial.

14. I have reminded myself of the Court of Appeal's decision in HKSAR v TING Chiu & another [2003] 3 HKLRD 378 regarding the sentencing of unarmed robberies.  Having considered all aspects of this case, I take the view that the appropriate starting point should be 4.5 years' imprisonment.  A one-third discount is given for the guilty plea, reducing the sentence to 3 years.

15. Based on the Summary of Facts, I accept that there would have been insufficient evidence against the defendant without his admissions.  He should receive more than the usual one-third discount.[1] On this basis, I will grant him a further reduction of 4 months.  Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further discount.  Hence, I sentence him to 32 months' imprisonment.