R. v. LEUNG KA WING

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1996, No.359
(Criminal)

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

Power, Ag. C.J.:

1. The applicant in this matter pleaded guilty to one charge of robbery which alleged that he and another outside the Good Luck Amusement Games Centre in Tuen Mun robbed the victim Cheung Chung-wai of $100 in cash.

2. The facts were that he and others approached two persons playing at the video games centre and made false accusations and threats of violence which included the smashing of a bottle and the use of it to threaten. The pretext upon which money was demanded was for medical fees because of a cut which the applicant inflicted upon himself in the course of making threats. One of the victims who tried to ward off the broken bottle also suffered a cut to his middle finger. The threats went on until the alarm was raised by a friend of the two victims after which the police then arrived and apprehended the applicant.

3. The trial Judge said when sentencing:

"I consider that this is a serious offence. It was a deliberate targeting of two people, possibly so you could obtain money for your drug habit. You were prepared to resort to a broken bottle, a particularly nasty weapon. I accept that the injury to the victim occurred when he tried to push away the bottle rather than as a result of your deliberately attacking him. Nevertheless, I consider it a very serious matter that people use broken bottles as weapons. You committed this offence, bolstered by somebody else. I have no doubt that if the victims had made any kind of resistance, you would have retaliated.

I take a starting point of 6 years for this offence. I take into account in mitigation the only factor I can take into account, which is your plea. You will be sentenced to 4 years' imprisonment."

The starting point of six years was, in the view of this court, an entirely appropriate one. The judge gave a one-third discount for plea which again was entirely appropriate. Nothing has been raised which would, in any way, make it proper for us to interfere with the sentence imposed and the application is, therefore, refused.