THE QUEEN v. SHUI KOK WA AND OTHERS

___________

JUDGMENT

___________

Yang, J.A.:

1. We have already dealt with the applications made on behalf of the 1st and the 3rd Applicants. At the last hearing we thought it appropriate to call for a Training centre report for the 2nd Applicant in view of his age. He was only 19½ when the offence was committed.

2. Both the probation report called for by the trial judge and the Training Centre report which was placed before us speak favourably of the Applicant. However the fact remains that the offence committed was a grave one. According to the agreed facts, when the three Applicants were inspecting the mink skins in the shop, knives were produced from the plastic bags which the three men had brought with them.

3. The trial judge in assessing the appropriate sentence for the 2nd Applicant took into consideration his plea of guilty, his age and also the Probation Officer's report, and he came to the view that a sentence of 6 years was appropriate. In the light of our decision on the 1st and the 3rd Applicants, we would think, all things being equal, a sentence in the region of 4 years would have been correct. Having said this, we must however place great emphasis on two matters raised in the Training Centre report. The first is the close support the Applicant still receives from his family, and his genuine concern for his family. The second is that he is trained as a decoration worker and it is his ambition to make a success of this career. We also have regard to the fact that this robbery, albeit serious, was not in domestic premises and was carried out during the day. With these two elements in mind, we are prepared to exercise clemency in this particular case and order that the Applicant be sent to a Training Centre.

4. The application is treated as an appeal proper, the appeal is allowed. We quash the sentence of 6 years originally imposed upon him and we order that the Applicant be sent to a Training centre.