HKSAR v. CHEUNG WING KEUNG

 DCCC1427/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1427 OF 2009

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to four offences, the first two charges are charges of burglary which were both committed on 16 November 2009.

2.  The 1st charge related to his burgling premises at the 1st floor of No.6A, Cheung Muk Tau, Sai Sha Road, in Ma On Shan, New Territories, where he stole a wallet, cash of $5,000 and 800 Renminbi.

3.  The 2nd charge of burglary was committed shortly after the first one, the premises being the 2nd floor of the same building. From those premises he stole a jacket and $30.

4.  The 3rd offence was committed the following day. Outside a pubic toilet on Sai Sha Road in Ma On Shan he was found in possession of a flick knife.

5.  The 4th charge relates to his remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration.

6.  The facts admitted by the defendant in relation to Charge 1 disclose that the victim and her husband and son live at the premises, the subject of the charge, and they retired to bed for the evening at 1 o’clock in the morning on 16 November having secured all the doors, windows, including the balcony metal gate, but not the balcony glass door.

7.  The next day the victim discovered that five of her handbags which had originally been placed in the living room were on the balcony, and she discovered that the money, the subject of the charge, was missing from one of her handbags.

8.  With regard to the 2nd charge, the victim and her boyfriend retired to bed at 11.30 on the evening of 15 November, again having locked all the windows, the balcony, including the metal gate but not the balcony glass door. When she got up the following day, she discovered that her handbag was on the balcony and there was some money missing from it. A jacket which she left in the living room was also missing.

9.  At 8.30 on the evening of 17 November officers were on patrol in Sai Sha Road when they spotted the defendant acting furtively outside a public toilet. He was searched and found in possession of a flick knife, a torch and three rolls of adhesive tape.

10.  He admitted he was an illegal immigrant. He was found in possession of the wallet from the victim in the first burglary and the jacket from the victim in the second burglary and also found in possession of 1,400 Renminbi and over HK$2,300. The wallet found in his possession and the jacket were identified by the owners of the burgled premises.

11.  The defendant told the police that he landed Hong Kong illegally on 16 November from Shenzhen. He admitted burgling the two premises. In respect of the first burglary, he told the police that he could not enter the flat because the balcony metal gate was locked. He therefore took a mop which had been conveniently left on the balcony for his use and inserted that into the flat and managed to hook the handbag onto the balcony and steal the contents in the wallet. Armed with the mop he went to the second flat and removed items from that flat also.

12.  The defendant has no previous convictions. I am told in mitigation that he is 23 years of age, he is single and he comes from a poor part of the mainland. He was educated to Form 2 standard. He was working in Shenzhen as a factory worker. Unfortunately, in 2009 his father was diagnosed with cancer and needed to borrow money for medical treatment. His father died last year and his family faced a loan of $40,000 from the loan sharks and pressure was being put on his family. He came to Hong Kong with a view to obtaining the money to repay the loan sharks.

13.  The defendant pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity to these offences. I note that he came to Hong Kong deliberately for the purpose of committing these offences and within a short time of arriving had carried out two burglaries and was found in possession of a flick knife. I note that the burgled premises, the living areas of the burgled premises were not actually entered by the defendant but he was there in the early hours of the morning whilst the occupants were asleep. And the following day in the same location, same area, he was found in possession of a flick knife.

14.  For those reasons I see no reason to depart from the usual level of sentencing for cases of domestic burglary. In respect of the first two charges, I take starting points of 3 years and reduce those sentences to 2 years to reflect the guilty plea of the defendant. In respect of the 3rd charge, I take a starting point of 9 months and reduce that to 6 months to reflect the guilty plea. In respect of the 4th charge, I impose a sentence of 15 months’ imprisonment.

15.  I have considered the question of totality. In respect of the first two charges where the sentences are 2 years’ imprisonment, I order that 4 months of the 2nd offence, the 2nd offence being committed very shortly after the 1st offence, to run consecutive to that 1st offence. In respect of the sentence for the 3rd offence of 6 months’ imprisonment, I impose that to run consecutive to Charges 1 and 2. In respect of the 4th charge, the sentence of 15 months will run consecutive to the sentences on Charges 1 to 3. The total sentence, therefore, will be one of 49 months’ imprisonment.