|
DCCC180/2011
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 180 OF 2011
----------------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v. |
|
| |
Yau Yuen-ming |
|
| ----------------------- |
| Before: |
H H Judge A. Wong |
| Date: |
14 June 2011 at 12.43 pm |
| Present: |
Ms Margaret Lau, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Ms Lam Pui-san, Pauline, of C P Lin & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant |
| Offence: |
Burglary (入屋犯法罪) |
---------------------
Reasons for Sentence
---------------------
1. The defendant was convicted upon his guilty plea of one charge of burglary.
2. In sentencing I take into account the whole circumstances of the case, including its nature and facts, background of the defendant and mitigation put forward on his behalf.
3. The facts which the defendant admitted reveal that he had entered as a trespasser a vacated school which was no longer in use intending to steal electricity wires inside. He was equipped with pliers. When he was found, all the electric wires in an electricity meter room had been cut. When he was arrested he admitted his intent to steal, saying that he believed no one was inside the school.
4. The defendant is 59 years old. He is married but his wife lives apart from him with their children. He is living on CSSA. He is not a first time offender. He was convicted for offences such as robbery, possession of offensive weapons, claiming to be a member of a triad society, possession of dangerous drugs and gambling. The last conviction before he committed the present offence was in 1999. He was able to keep out of trouble for more than 10 years. It is sad that he committed another offence again.
5. I was told he committed the present offence due to poverty. In a difficult situation he could not stand the moment of greed. I was also told that in committing the present offence he fell and suffered injury in his leg.
6. Offence of this nature normally calls for immediate custodial sentence. In all the circumstances of the present case, I see no reason to depart from the norm.
7. A starting point usually adopted for burglary cases occurred in non-domestic premises is 2½ years. The school which the defendant entered was not being used. I believe the defendant thought that there was nobody inside and the chance of confrontation was low. However, he was wrong.
8. In all the circumstances, I consider a starting point of 2 years and 3 months appropriate and sufficient. The defendant pleaded guilty, he is entitled to a one-third discount for this reason. He suffered injuries in the course of commission of the offence and I am prepared to give him a further discount of 3 months.
9. In all the circumstances, I am of the view that this is the extent of discount the defendant is entitled to in this case.
10. For these reasons I sentence the defendant to 15 months’ imprisonment.
|