FONG MING KWONG v. R.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1994, No. 230
(Criminal)

___________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

Wong J. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The applicant, who was D2 in the court below, was jointly charged with three other men in respect of two charges of handling stolen property. Both he and another defendant, D3, pleaded guilty to both charges before His Honour Judge Caird in the District Court.

2. The applicant was sentenced to two years and eight months' imprisonment and D3 was sentenced to two years and ten months' imprisonment. The judge drew a distinction between the applicant and D3 on the ground that the culpability of D3 was slightly greater than that of the applicant, and hence, the two months difference. The applicant now seeks leave to appeal against this sentence, not on the ground that it is too severe, but instead he asks the Court for leniency.

3. On 31st August, he sent a letter to the Judiciary Administrator in which he raised a number of matters. The first was that he pleaded guilty and therefore court time, manpower of the police and public expenses were saved. He explained why he jumped bail and that he felt extremely remorseful. He also said that he committed offences because of poor family circumstances. He was earning a meager income as a renovation worker. He has a seven year old son to look after and his wife was pregnant. He also has aged parents and at that time he was addicted to dangerous drugs. Since his imprisonment his family has suffered financial hardship.

4. The stolen properties were two motor cars, namely a Mercedes Benz and a BMW. These cars were stolen just one day before they were about to be shipped to Mainland China by these defendants. The defendants were arrested by police while they were lifting the cars into a high powered speedboat with the help of an excavator at Tweed Bay, Stanley. The police had been conducting a surveillance operation around that area.

5. Before us, the applicant said nothing. He relied entirely on his written submission except to add that he was suffering from tuberculosis which required medical treatment in prison.

6. The theft of expensive motor cars has been prevalent during the past few years and is still prevalent. This has generated concern and alarm among members of the public. A great deal of time and effort have been spent by the police to crack down these activities. It is clear that deterrent sentences must be imposed.

7. The applicant himself acknowledges that he was treated leniently. He only asks us to reduce the sentence on the ground of his personal circumstances. In our view, his personal circumstances are no different from other individuals in Hong Kong. There is nothing to merit special treatment.

8. The judge has taken everything into consideration and gives him a discount, which is generous. The applicant for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.