THE QUEEN v. LEUNG YIU-HUNG AND OTHERS

__________

JUDGMENT

__________

Yang, J. A.:

1. Between the 29th December, 1983 and 25th January 1984, a gang of youths (of whom the Defendants were members) invaded certain private club premises in the Tsimshatsui area and committed robberies or attempted robberies therein. Except for one case, where a robbery took place at 2.30 in the afternoon, all the other offences were committed in the small hours of the morning. The intruders entered the club premises pretending to be customers and then at an opportune moment produced knives and declared a robbery. The inmates were threatened with knives and tied up. The total value of property taken in the robbery came to some $106,000.

2. The Applicants all pleaded guilty and co-operated with the police in their investigation. Except for the 5th accused who has a previous record of three convictions in 1980, the others have clear records.

3. Mr. Keane argues that in the light of the ages of the Applicants, which range from 15 to 22 years, the totality of sentences should be in the region of 9 years after trial. It is further argued that the heavier sentence of 11 years imposed upon the 5th accused was attributable to his previous convictions. We have had cited to us the well known case of Mo Kong. Sang. Having regard to the fact that in our case almost all the offences were committed at night and there was a multiplicity of offences, it would appear that the robberies and the attempted robberies come more appropriately within holding(5) of that judgment. It seems to us that a totality of some 12 years would be appropriate in this case after trial, and therefore on the plea of guilty and having regard to all the circumstances of the case, particularly the ages of the accused, except for the case of the 5th accused, a totality of 9 years is appropriate.

4. In the case of the 5th accused, however, it is legitimate to take into consideration that he is slightly older than some of his colleagues and that he does have a record. In view of these two factors, and also the fact that he pleaded guilty to four robberies and one attempt, a totality of 11 years is in our view appropriate after a plea of guilty.

5. It would appear from the trial Judge's reasoning that he dealt with each accused individually, taking into consideration each Defendant's age, record and plea, etc. He also took into consideration the number of charges each Defendant had to face. It was the care with which he dealt with the case which led him to impose different sentences on different accused. In spite of very able arguments by Counsel we do not think that we should interfere with those sentences.

6. Finally, in the course of argument we have been invited to take this opportunity to lay down certain guidelines for discounts where pleas of guilty are entered. We do not think that it would be helpful to lay dorm such guidelines because each case must be dealt with on its individual merits, depending on the circumstances of the case and the circumstances which led an accused to plead guilty.

7. For the reasons stated above, we dismiss the application for leave to appeal against sentences.