|
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
1987, No. 152
(Criminal)
BETWEEN
THE QUEEN
and
YIP PUI-CHUNG
______________
Coram: Hon. Cons,V.-P., Yang, V.-P. and Power, J.A.
Date of hearing: 14th July, 1987.
Date of delivery of judgment: 14th July 1987.
______________
J U D G M E N T
______________
Cons, V.-P. delivered the judgment of the Court:
1. This is an application for leave to appeal against the decision of His Honour Judge Sharwood whereby he convicted the Applicant of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and blackmail. He sentenced the Applicant to nine months and two years respectively, the sentences to run consecutively.
2. The victim works' as a waiter in his father’s noodle shop. On 30th June last year he had an altercation with the Defendant, who accused him of being very arrogant and of teasing the lady with whom he was eating, during his temporary absence. The Defendant then assaulted the victim, punching him at least twice in the face.
3. The next day the Defendant returned with some “friends”. He demanded $5,000 as compensation for the injuries he said he had received to his hand and backed his demand with threats that the shop would otherwise be burnt down and the business brought to a stand still. The victim's father managed by persuasion to reduce the demand to $2,000, which sum was duly paid over.
4. The Defendant has today abandoned his application as far as it regards conviction. As to sentence, he is 34 years of age, single, with a long record commencing with robbery at the age of 18. There are other offences of dishonesty but mostly the record is connected with dangerous drugs
5. Miss Corcoran has said everything that could be said for him. Perhaps her strongest point is the suggestion that because the offences are, as she termed them, “linked”, they should be concurrent rather than consecutive. It is true t hat the offences are not unconnected, in that the first was the excuse for the second. Nevertheless, we are not persuaded that they can be looked upon as one single transaction.
6. Miss Corcoran has observed that the injuries in respect of the first charge were, slight and that, from the Defendant's point of view at least there was some provocation for the second. If that is so then we have to observe that his reaction was of a kind that has to be seriously discouraged.
7. In all the circumstances we cannot say that a total sentence of two years and nine months is excessive and we accordingly dismiss the application.
|
(D. Cons)
Vice-President
|
(T.L. Yang)
Vice-President
|
(N.P. Power)
Justice of Appeal
|
Miss Camel P. Corcoran, (M/s Michael O'Cock & Partners) for Applicant
A.A. Bruce, Crown Counsel for Respondent
|