|
DCCC 203/2014
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO 203 OF 2014
----------------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v |
|
| |
Hung Wai-kay |
|
| ---------------------- |
| Date: |
22 April 2014 at 2.58 pm |
| Present: |
Ms Lai Ting-wai, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR |
| |
Mr Arthur Chan, of Rowland Chow, Chan, & Co, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant |
| Offence: |
(1) to (8) Burglary (入屋犯法罪) |
---------------------
Reasons for Sentence
---------------------
1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to 8 charges of burglary.
2. The first offence was committed in November 2012 and the last offence in December 2013. All the offences were committed in commercial premises. The first offence was committed at a place of worship, two of the offences were committed in restaurants, one being the kitchen of a restaurant, the other a teahouse. Two offences were committed in Chinese medicine clinics and three in educational centres.
3. From the place of worship, the defendant stole a cashbox in which there was $3,000. All the other thefts involved thefts of wallets or mobile phones. His involvement in the offences was in most cases recorded by CCTV footage taken inside the premises concerned.
4. The final offence which was committed on 4 December 2013 at the Hong Kong Academy of Fine Arts which is on the 2nd Floor of Tang’s Mansion in Nathan Road, Yau Ma Tei. These premises are used for drawing classes and access is limited to members. The victim in that case placed her handbag containing a pink-cased Samsung Galaxy mobile phone worth $5,500 on the cupboard of a classroom facing the entrance. She noticed the defendant entering the premises but paid no attention to him.
5. At about 12.42, two police officers were patrolling on Nathan Road and they saw the defendant enter the Tang’s Mansion. They saw him leaving about 13 minutes later and behaving suspiciously, so they stopped him. When they searched him, they found the Samsung Galaxy phone belonging to PW9, and he admitted that he had stolen the phone.
6. The defendant was interviewed and he not only admitted that offence, but he also admitted the seven other offences to which he has pleaded guilty today. He told the police in interview that he needed the money to take care of his mother and for his daily expenses.
7. The defendant has been before the court on 13 previous occasions and has a total of 27 convictions recorded against him. 19 of those offences concern offences of dishonesty, 15 for theft, one of attempted theft and three for obtaining by deception. He was last released from prison in 2011. He has never been convicted of an offence of burglary previously and the highest sentence he received in the past was one of 10 months’ imprisonment.
8. The defendant is 62 years of age. He was educated to Form 2 level. I am told he is divorced and lives in Shenzhen but he comes to Hong Kong to visit his mother. His mother is 89 and she lives in a government subsidised accommodation. And he has a son aged 32.
9. I am told that in the past the defendant has worked as a shopkeeper casually earning some $2,500 per month, but did not claim CSSA. At the time of his arrest, he was unemployed. I am told that he has been living in Shenzhen for about 5 years.
10. In mitigation, it was urged upon the court that the defendant was very cooperative with the police; when he was arrested he has admitted all the offences. This has saved considerable time. No force or weapon was used. The offences were opportunistic. The defendant would sneak into premises and steal whatever property he could put his hands on.
11. I am told that he is anxious that the prison imposed on him be as short as possible so that he can look after his mother.
12. The usual sentence for offences involving non-domestic premises, burgling non-domestic premises is a sentence of 2½ years’ imprisonment. I have decided that that is the appropriate sentence in respect of all 8 charges.
13. I have to consider the question of totality. What I have decided to do is in respect of Charges -- I impose 2½ years as a starting point for each of the offences and I order that 6 months of the sentence on Charges 5 to 8 will run consecutive to the charges on 1 to 4. And I will make a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment in respect of all the offences.
14. The defendant is entitled to credit for his guilty plea. So I will reduce that sentence by one-third and the
overall sentence will be 2 years’ imprisonment. That will be 20 months on all the charges. And in respect of Charges 5 to 8, 4 months will be consecutive to Charges 1 to 4.
|