HKSAR v. PHAM VAN-CONG

DCCC1119/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONGSPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1119 OF 2009

----------------------

----------------------

---------------------

Reasons for Sentence

---------------------

1.  The defendant was charged for wounding with intent, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences Against the Person Ordinance, Cap.212. The defendant pleaded guilty and admitted the facts. He was convicted accordingly.

Facts

2.  At 1740 hours on 15 August 2009, inside the food court of Stanley Correctional Institution, the defendant stabbed the victim from behind on his left face with a sharpened toothbrush of 5 inches long while the victim was lying on a bench having a rest. The victim pushed the defendant away, but the defendant rushed towards him again with the sharpened toothbrush. A struggle between the two ensued.

3.  As a result, the victim was sent to hospital for medical treatment. He was hospitalised for four days. Medical examinations revealed that he had a deep laceration on his left face, fresh tenderness on his left face and abrasions on his leg.

4.  Under caution, the defendant admitted he stabbed the victim with the toothbrush he picked up at the toilet of the food court because he had an argument with the victim a week ago, and he attacked the victim as he was emotional.

5.  After considerations, I consider the appropriate starting point to be one of 3 years. The defendant is entitled to one-third discount for his plea.

Mitigations

6.  The defendant, aged 32, a Vietnamese, he was serving a sentence of 5 years for robbery, illegal remaining and breach of deportation order and due to be released on 13 October 2010 for that. He has eight previous convictions record, mostly concern violence. It appeared from his record that he committed further offences shortly after he was released from prison on each previous occasion.

7.  In mitigations, the defence said prior to the incident, the defendant had an argument with the victim while they were playing chess in the prison. I note, however, that was a week before, and at the material time the victim was resting and the defendant was not subject to any provocation.

8.  I was also referred to the medical reports of the defendant. However, I do not notice any significance out of them and I do not consider that warrants any further deductions of sentence. However, taking into account of the totality considerations, I order 6 months to be served concurrent and 18 months consecutive with his current sentence.

Order

9.  The defendant is sentenced to 24-month imprisonment, 6 months concurrent and 18 months consecutive with the sentence of DC522 of 2007.