DCCC294/2011 HKSAR v. FREDERICK DAVID PENNEY - LawHero
DCCC294/2011
HKSAR v. FREDERICK DAVID PENNEY
區域法院（刑事）H H Judge Yau31/8/2011
DCCC294/2011
A A
DCCC294/2011
B IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE B
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
C CRIMINAL CASE NO. 294 OF 2011 C
----------------------
D D
HKSAR
E E
v.
F F
Frederick David Penney
G ---------------------- G
H Before: H H Judge Yau H
Date: 1 September 2011 at 11.44 am
Present: Ms Lisa Go, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
I I
Mr Christopher Neil Morley, of Messrs Haldanes, assigned by the Director
of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
J Offence: (1) Attempted robbery (企圖搶劫罪) J
(2) Assaulting a police officer (襲擊警務人員)
K (3) Breach of condition of stay (違反逗留條件) K
---------------------
L L
Reasons for Sentence
M M
---------------------
N N
1. The defendant, Mr Frederick David Penney, faces three charges. Charge 1
O O
is attempted robbery, contrary to section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Chapter 210, and
P section 159G of the Crimes Ordinance, Chapter 200. Charge 2 is assaulting a police P
officer, contrary to section 36(b) of the Offences Against the Person Ordinance, Chapter
Q Q
212. Charge 3 is breach of condition of stay, contrary to section 41 of the Immigration
Ordinance, Chapter 115. The particulars of offences of these three charges are set out in
R R
the charge sheet, and the court is not going to repeat them here now.
S S
2. The defendant pleads guilty to Charges 1 and 3, and Charge 2 is left on
T T
court file and not to be activated without the leave of this court or the Court of Appeal.
U Facts Admitted U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 1 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
3. At about 2000 hours on 16 January 2011, the victim parked his car at the
B parking space No. 2003, Rumsey Street Multi-storey Car Park at No. 2 Rumsey Street, B
Central, Hong Kong. He put $30,000 cash into a bag and then alighted from the
C vehicle. The defendant wearing a surgical mask pointed a knife of a wine opener at the C
victim’s neck and declared robbery, demanding the victim to hand over the bag in which
D D
he had just put in the $30,000. The defendant pushed the victim back into the car, and
E the victim struggled with the defendant and shouted for help. E
F F
4. An off-duty police officer happened to be nearby and he declared his police
G identity to the defendant. The defendant threw a bag at the police officer and started to G
run. The police officer gave chase and the defendant threw a mobile telephone at him,
H hitting the officer’s lip. The defendant escaped. H
I I
5. Medical examination revealed that the victim suffered from tenderness over
J right chest wall, bruising over left wrist and abrasion on face, both wrists and hands. J
The police officer suffered from tenderness on upper lip and abrasion on both palms and
K K
right knee.
L L
6. The police arrested the defendant outside his residence in Lamma Island at
M about 1820 hours on 17 January 2011. He denied the offence under caution. The M
fingerprint of the defendant’s left ring finger was found on the outside of the offside front
N N
door window of the victim’s vehicle.
O O
7. The defendant was found to be an American who was only allowed to stay
P in Hong Kong until 27 December 2010. P
Q Q
Criminal Record
R 8. The defendant has a clear criminal record. R
S Psychological and Psychiatric Reports S
9. The court obtains a psychological and a psychiatric report of the defendant
T T
before sentencing. According to the psychological report, the defendant was born in the
U United States and is the second among six siblings. His father was a fisherman who U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 2 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
often got drunk. His parents divorced when he was 16 years old. The defendant was
B active in sport while at school and completed university education. He had the B
experience of being sexually assaulted while being an altar boy. He married twice and
C had two children in each marriage. C
D D
10. He came to live in Hong Kong with his girlfriend. The defendant is
E industrious at work but problematic in both social and intimate relationship. He became E
emotionally vulnerable when having relationship problem with his girlfriend. He
F F
separated from his girlfriend and moved out on his own on the day of the offence. He
G got drunk in Central and missed the ferry back to Lamma Island where he lived. He G
then committed the offence of robbery.
H H
11. The psychologist is of the conclusion that the defendant displays no sign of
I I
cognitive impairment or gross psychopathology but was likely experiencing adjustment
J disorder with depressed mood prior to committing the offences. His difficulty in J
adjusting to the relationship problem with his girlfriend and his drinking problem
K K
contributed to the offence.
L L
12. The psychologist finds that the defendant does not appear to be sincere in
M depicting the offence details and that his remorsefulness is very shallow. The M
psychologist opines that the defendant’s readiness for change is fair, and programmes
N N
targeting his drinking problem is(are?) beneficial to him.
O O
13. The psychiatrist reports that the defendant spoke coherently and relevantly
P P
with no psychotic symptoms or cognitive deficit elicited. He is of the view that the
Q
defendant could be suffering from adjustment problems due to the issues in his Q
relationship with his girlfriend and he had misused alcohol to cope with his stress. The
R psychiatrist is of the view that the defendant may benefit from psychological counselling R
at an outpatient clinic.
S S
T Mitigation T
14. The defendant was born in Boston, USA in 1962. The solicitor
U U
representing the defendant sets out in mitigation the background of the defendant which
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 3 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
is similar to that in the psychologist’s report. The defendant studied management
B marketing and computer science in the university. The defence solicitor submits to B
court the various certificates of the defendant’s academic achievements.
C C
15. The defendant came to Hong Kong in 2006 to set up his own business, the
D D
Max Wave Development Limited which he ran with his girlfriend. The business was a
E success. The defence solicitor submits to court information about this company. E
F F
16. The defence solicitor says in mitigation that even the defendant himself
G cannot explain why he committed the robbery and points out that the depression of the G
defendant and his relationship problem with his girlfriend contributed to the offence.
H The defence solicitor tenders to court a letter of apology written by the defendant H
addressed to the victim. The defence solicitor points out that the defendant apologises
I I
sincerely to the victim.
J J
17. The defence solicitor also submits to court mitigation letters written by the
K defendant’s mother, stepfather and a friend. They all express good opinion of the K
defendant, saying that he is an honest and trustworthy person. They are of the view that
L L
the offence is totally out of the character of the defendant.
M M
18. Defence solicitor points out that according to the diagnosis of the
N psychologist and the psychiatrist, the defendant suffers from adjustment disorder which is N
a mental disease. The defence solicitor submits that such a disease may have an effect
O O
on the criminal culpability of the defendant and is a factor to be considered by the court
P in deciding whether a deterrent sentence is to be imposed. The defence solicitor tenders P
to court articles giving detailed information about this disease. He urges the court to
Q Q
obtain further psychologist and psychiatrist reports on the defendant or summons the
R psychologist and psychiatrist to give evidence in court on how the disease relates to the R
offence committed by the defendant, which is refused by the court.
S S
19. The defence solicitor cites Mo Kwong Sang v R [1981] HKLR 610 and
T T
HKSAR v Ng Oi Cheung [2009] 5 HKC 431 in mitigation, and the court will deal with
U them later. U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 4 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
20. In respect of the offence of breach of condition of stay, the defence solicitor
B submits that the usual sentence in magistrates’ court is one of a suspended sentence, B
depending on the duration of the overstaying. He reminds the court that in the present
C case, the duration of the defendant’s overstay is one of about six weeks. C
D D
Sentence
E 21. Robbery is a very serious offence carrying a maximum sentence of life E
imprisonment. Of course, such a sentence is reserved for the most serious type of such
F F
offence. According to Mo Kwong Sang v R, a case which the defence solicitor cites in
G mitigation, the appropriate sentence in an ordinary case of armed robbery where the G
defendant carried a knife or other dangerous weapon which he displayed to the victim
H should be 5 years’ imprisonment. H
I I
22. In the present case, the defendant pointed the knife of a wine opener at the
J neck of the victim. It would not be difficult to imagine the degree of fear the victim was J
put under because cutting the neck with a knife could cause fatal injuries. The use of
K K
the knife by the defendant in such a manner is no doubt a factor the court has to consider
L
in sentencing. L
M 23. The other case cited by the defence solicitor is HKSAR v Ng Oi Cheung. M
In this case, the appellant held a piece of broken glass in his gloved hand about a foot
N N
away from the cashier of a convenience store and asked for money. The cashier said no
O and shouted for help. The appellant tried to leave when an off-duty police officer went O
into the store in response to the cashier’s shout for help. The defendant was arrested.
P P
Suicidal notes were found in the plastic bag carried by the defendant. The defendant
Q
admitted that he wrote the suicidal notes and then discovered he had no money to buy Q
charcoal to commit the suicide, and at that moment he decided to embark on the offence.
R The appellant was diagnosed by a psychologist to be severely depressed at the time of R
offence to the extent that his ability to think and his judgment became impaired by his
S S
poor mental state. The psychiatrist also found the appellant suffering from recurrent
T depressive disorder. T
U U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 5 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
24. The Court of Appeal came to the conclusion that the appellant committed
B the offence in a highly depressed state, having set his mind on ending his life. The B
Court of Appeal substituted the offence of 3 years 2 months’ imprisonment imposed by
C the District Court with an order of probation for 3 years. C
D D
25. The circumstances of the defendant in the present case differ substantially
E from those in Ng Oi Cheung. Both the psychologist and psychiatrist in the present case E
come to the conclusion that the defendant is likely or could have been suffering from
F F
adjustment disorder with depressed mood. The choices of the word “likely” or “could
G have been” demonstrate that the two medical personnel are not so sure about the mental G
condition of the defendant.
H H
26. They are, however, both of the view that the defendant displays no sign of
I I
cognitive impairment. The psychologist points out that the defendant has no difficulty
to differentiate right from wrong. He even points out that the remorsefulness of the
J J
defendant is very shallow. He is of the view that programmes aimed at tackling the
K defendant’s problematic drinking is beneficial to him. He is obviously of the view that K
it was the drinking habit of the defendant that needed to be treated.
L L
M 27. The psychiatrist is of the view that the defendant may benefit from M
psychological counselling. But again it is clear from the report of the psychiatrist that
N the condition of the defendant was mostly induced by his alcoholic consumption. N
O O
28. Judging from the reports of the psychologist and the psychiatrist, the court
P is of no doubt that the defendant knew very well what he was doing at the time of P
robbery, and the adjustment disorder of the defendant was not to the extent as to impair
Q Q
his ability to think and to make judgment. There is also no indication from the reports
R that the defendant has a suicidal tendency. All these distinguish the present case from R
Ng Oi Cheung which was decided very much on its own facts. It is also for this reason
S that the court does not accept the submission of the defence solicitor to obtain further S
psychological and psychiatric reports on the defendant or to summons the psychologist or
T T
psychiatrist to come to give evidence in court.
U U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 6 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
29. The defence solicitor submits that no planning was involved in the present
B case. The court has much reservation about this submission. The defendant took B
along a wine opener with knife to the car park where the offence took place. He was
C wearing a surgical mask at the time when he committed the offence. It also happened C
that the victim had just put $30,000 into a bag, and then the defendant demanded the
D D
victim to surrender the bag during the robbery. All this showed at least some degree of
E planning of the robbery. E
F F
30. Having considered the whole circumstances of the case, the court is of the
G view that although the present case is one of attempted robbery, it falls within the type of G
robbery involving the use of knife envisaged in Mo Kwong Sang. The court, however,
H takes into account that the knife used by the defendant was part of a wine opener with a H
blade of only 2 inches.
I I
J 31. After considering all these factors, the court adopts a starting point of 4 J
years’ imprisonment for the charge of attempted robbery. In a case of this nature, the
K K
court is of the view that the previous good character of the defendant does not constitute
L
a valid mitigation, but the court is prepared to give some discount to the defendant L
because of his mental condition. The defendant is of course also entitled to the credit of
M his guilty plea. The court therefore sentences the defendant to 2 years 5 months’ M
imprisonment for Charge 1.
N N
O 32. For the offence of breach of condition of stay, having taken into O
consideration all the circumstances of the case, including the guilty plea of the defendant,
P P
the court imposes a sentence of 1-month imprisonment.
Q Q
33. Having considered the nature of the case and the totality principle, the court
R orders the sentences of the two offences to run consecutively. The defendant is to go to R
gaol for 2 years 6 months.
S S
T T
U H H Judge Yau U
District Court Judge
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 7 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
DCCC294/2011
B IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE B
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
C CRIMINAL CASE NO. 294 OF 2011 C
----------------------
D D
HKSAR
E E
v.
F F
Frederick David Penney
G ---------------------- G
H Before: H H Judge Yau H
Date: 1 September 2011 at 11.44 am
Present: Ms Lisa Go, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
I I
Mr Christopher Neil Morley, of Messrs Haldanes, assigned by the Director
of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
J Offence: (1) Attempted robbery (企圖搶劫罪) J
(2) Assaulting a police officer (襲擊警務人員)
K (3) Breach of condition of stay (違反逗留條件) K
---------------------
L L
Reasons for Sentence
M M
---------------------
N N
1. The defendant, Mr Frederick David Penney, faces three charges. Charge 1
O O
is attempted robbery, contrary to section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Chapter 210, and
P section 159G of the Crimes Ordinance, Chapter 200. Charge 2 is assaulting a police P
officer, contrary to section 36(b) of the Offences Against the Person Ordinance, Chapter
Q Q
212. Charge 3 is breach of condition of stay, contrary to section 41 of the Immigration
Ordinance, Chapter 115. The particulars of offences of these three charges are set out in
R R
the charge sheet, and the court is not going to repeat them here now.
S S
2. The defendant pleads guilty to Charges 1 and 3, and Charge 2 is left on
T T
court file and not to be activated without the leave of this court or the Court of Appeal.
U Facts Admitted U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 1 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
3. At about 2000 hours on 16 January 2011, the victim parked his car at the
B parking space No. 2003, Rumsey Street Multi-storey Car Park at No. 2 Rumsey Street, B
Central, Hong Kong. He put $30,000 cash into a bag and then alighted from the
C vehicle. The defendant wearing a surgical mask pointed a knife of a wine opener at the C
victim’s neck and declared robbery, demanding the victim to hand over the bag in which
D D
he had just put in the $30,000. The defendant pushed the victim back into the car, and
E the victim struggled with the defendant and shouted for help. E
F F
4. An off-duty police officer happened to be nearby and he declared his police
G identity to the defendant. The defendant threw a bag at the police officer and started to G
run. The police officer gave chase and the defendant threw a mobile telephone at him,
H hitting the officer’s lip. The defendant escaped. H
I I
5. Medical examination revealed that the victim suffered from tenderness over
J right chest wall, bruising over left wrist and abrasion on face, both wrists and hands. J
The police officer suffered from tenderness on upper lip and abrasion on both palms and
K K
right knee.
L L
6. The police arrested the defendant outside his residence in Lamma Island at
M about 1820 hours on 17 January 2011. He denied the offence under caution. The M
fingerprint of the defendant’s left ring finger was found on the outside of the offside front
N N
door window of the victim’s vehicle.
O O
7. The defendant was found to be an American who was only allowed to stay
P in Hong Kong until 27 December 2010. P
Q Q
Criminal Record
R 8. The defendant has a clear criminal record. R
S Psychological and Psychiatric Reports S
9. The court obtains a psychological and a psychiatric report of the defendant
T T
before sentencing. According to the psychological report, the defendant was born in the
U United States and is the second among six siblings. His father was a fisherman who U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 2 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
often got drunk. His parents divorced when he was 16 years old. The defendant was
B active in sport while at school and completed university education. He had the B
experience of being sexually assaulted while being an altar boy. He married twice and
C had two children in each marriage. C
D D
10. He came to live in Hong Kong with his girlfriend. The defendant is
E industrious at work but problematic in both social and intimate relationship. He became E
emotionally vulnerable when having relationship problem with his girlfriend. He
F F
separated from his girlfriend and moved out on his own on the day of the offence. He
G got drunk in Central and missed the ferry back to Lamma Island where he lived. He G
then committed the offence of robbery.
H H
11. The psychologist is of the conclusion that the defendant displays no sign of
I I
cognitive impairment or gross psychopathology but was likely experiencing adjustment
J disorder with depressed mood prior to committing the offences. His difficulty in J
adjusting to the relationship problem with his girlfriend and his drinking problem
K K
contributed to the offence.
L L
12. The psychologist finds that the defendant does not appear to be sincere in
M depicting the offence details and that his remorsefulness is very shallow. The M
psychologist opines that the defendant’s readiness for change is fair, and programmes
N N
targeting his drinking problem is(are?) beneficial to him.
O O
13. The psychiatrist reports that the defendant spoke coherently and relevantly
P P
with no psychotic symptoms or cognitive deficit elicited. He is of the view that the
Q
defendant could be suffering from adjustment problems due to the issues in his Q
relationship with his girlfriend and he had misused alcohol to cope with his stress. The
R psychiatrist is of the view that the defendant may benefit from psychological counselling R
at an outpatient clinic.
S S
T Mitigation T
14. The defendant was born in Boston, USA in 1962. The solicitor
U U
representing the defendant sets out in mitigation the background of the defendant which
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 3 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
is similar to that in the psychologist’s report. The defendant studied management
B marketing and computer science in the university. The defence solicitor submits to B
court the various certificates of the defendant’s academic achievements.
C C
15. The defendant came to Hong Kong in 2006 to set up his own business, the
D D
Max Wave Development Limited which he ran with his girlfriend. The business was a
E success. The defence solicitor submits to court information about this company. E
F F
16. The defence solicitor says in mitigation that even the defendant himself
G cannot explain why he committed the robbery and points out that the depression of the G
defendant and his relationship problem with his girlfriend contributed to the offence.
H The defence solicitor tenders to court a letter of apology written by the defendant H
addressed to the victim. The defence solicitor points out that the defendant apologises
I I
sincerely to the victim.
J J
17. The defence solicitor also submits to court mitigation letters written by the
K defendant’s mother, stepfather and a friend. They all express good opinion of the K
defendant, saying that he is an honest and trustworthy person. They are of the view that
L L
the offence is totally out of the character of the defendant.
M M
18. Defence solicitor points out that according to the diagnosis of the
N psychologist and the psychiatrist, the defendant suffers from adjustment disorder which is N
a mental disease. The defence solicitor submits that such a disease may have an effect
O O
on the criminal culpability of the defendant and is a factor to be considered by the court
P in deciding whether a deterrent sentence is to be imposed. The defence solicitor tenders P
to court articles giving detailed information about this disease. He urges the court to
Q Q
obtain further psychologist and psychiatrist reports on the defendant or summons the
R psychologist and psychiatrist to give evidence in court on how the disease relates to the R
offence committed by the defendant, which is refused by the court.
S S
19. The defence solicitor cites Mo Kwong Sang v R [1981] HKLR 610 and
T T
HKSAR v Ng Oi Cheung [2009] 5 HKC 431 in mitigation, and the court will deal with
U them later. U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 4 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
20. In respect of the offence of breach of condition of stay, the defence solicitor
B submits that the usual sentence in magistrates’ court is one of a suspended sentence, B
depending on the duration of the overstaying. He reminds the court that in the present
C case, the duration of the defendant’s overstay is one of about six weeks. C
D D
Sentence
E 21. Robbery is a very serious offence carrying a maximum sentence of life E
imprisonment. Of course, such a sentence is reserved for the most serious type of such
F F
offence. According to Mo Kwong Sang v R, a case which the defence solicitor cites in
G mitigation, the appropriate sentence in an ordinary case of armed robbery where the G
defendant carried a knife or other dangerous weapon which he displayed to the victim
H should be 5 years’ imprisonment. H
I I
22. In the present case, the defendant pointed the knife of a wine opener at the
J neck of the victim. It would not be difficult to imagine the degree of fear the victim was J
put under because cutting the neck with a knife could cause fatal injuries. The use of
K K
the knife by the defendant in such a manner is no doubt a factor the court has to consider
L
in sentencing. L
M 23. The other case cited by the defence solicitor is HKSAR v Ng Oi Cheung. M
In this case, the appellant held a piece of broken glass in his gloved hand about a foot
N N
away from the cashier of a convenience store and asked for money. The cashier said no
O and shouted for help. The appellant tried to leave when an off-duty police officer went O
into the store in response to the cashier’s shout for help. The defendant was arrested.
P P
Suicidal notes were found in the plastic bag carried by the defendant. The defendant
Q
admitted that he wrote the suicidal notes and then discovered he had no money to buy Q
charcoal to commit the suicide, and at that moment he decided to embark on the offence.
R The appellant was diagnosed by a psychologist to be severely depressed at the time of R
offence to the extent that his ability to think and his judgment became impaired by his
S S
poor mental state. The psychiatrist also found the appellant suffering from recurrent
T depressive disorder. T
U U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 5 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
24. The Court of Appeal came to the conclusion that the appellant committed
B the offence in a highly depressed state, having set his mind on ending his life. The B
Court of Appeal substituted the offence of 3 years 2 months’ imprisonment imposed by
C the District Court with an order of probation for 3 years. C
D D
25. The circumstances of the defendant in the present case differ substantially
E from those in Ng Oi Cheung. Both the psychologist and psychiatrist in the present case E
come to the conclusion that the defendant is likely or could have been suffering from
F F
adjustment disorder with depressed mood. The choices of the word “likely” or “could
G have been” demonstrate that the two medical personnel are not so sure about the mental G
condition of the defendant.
H H
26. They are, however, both of the view that the defendant displays no sign of
I I
cognitive impairment. The psychologist points out that the defendant has no difficulty
to differentiate right from wrong. He even points out that the remorsefulness of the
J J
defendant is very shallow. He is of the view that programmes aimed at tackling the
K defendant’s problematic drinking is beneficial to him. He is obviously of the view that K
it was the drinking habit of the defendant that needed to be treated.
L L
M 27. The psychiatrist is of the view that the defendant may benefit from M
psychological counselling. But again it is clear from the report of the psychiatrist that
N the condition of the defendant was mostly induced by his alcoholic consumption. N
O O
28. Judging from the reports of the psychologist and the psychiatrist, the court
P is of no doubt that the defendant knew very well what he was doing at the time of P
robbery, and the adjustment disorder of the defendant was not to the extent as to impair
Q Q
his ability to think and to make judgment. There is also no indication from the reports
R that the defendant has a suicidal tendency. All these distinguish the present case from R
Ng Oi Cheung which was decided very much on its own facts. It is also for this reason
S that the court does not accept the submission of the defence solicitor to obtain further S
psychological and psychiatric reports on the defendant or to summons the psychologist or
T T
psychiatrist to come to give evidence in court.
U U
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 6 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V
A A
29. The defence solicitor submits that no planning was involved in the present
B case. The court has much reservation about this submission. The defendant took B
along a wine opener with knife to the car park where the offence took place. He was
C wearing a surgical mask at the time when he committed the offence. It also happened C
that the victim had just put $30,000 into a bag, and then the defendant demanded the
D D
victim to surrender the bag during the robbery. All this showed at least some degree of
E planning of the robbery. E
F F
30. Having considered the whole circumstances of the case, the court is of the
G view that although the present case is one of attempted robbery, it falls within the type of G
robbery involving the use of knife envisaged in Mo Kwong Sang. The court, however,
H takes into account that the knife used by the defendant was part of a wine opener with a H
blade of only 2 inches.
I I
J 31. After considering all these factors, the court adopts a starting point of 4 J
years’ imprisonment for the charge of attempted robbery. In a case of this nature, the
K K
court is of the view that the previous good character of the defendant does not constitute
L
a valid mitigation, but the court is prepared to give some discount to the defendant L
because of his mental condition. The defendant is of course also entitled to the credit of
M his guilty plea. The court therefore sentences the defendant to 2 years 5 months’ M
imprisonment for Charge 1.
N N
O 32. For the offence of breach of condition of stay, having taken into O
consideration all the circumstances of the case, including the guilty plea of the defendant,
P P
the court imposes a sentence of 1-month imprisonment.
Q Q
33. Having considered the nature of the case and the totality principle, the court
R orders the sentences of the two offences to run consecutively. The defendant is to go to R
gaol for 2 years 6 months.
S S
T T
U H H Judge Yau U
District Court Judge
CRT34/1.9.2011/SC 7 DCCC294/2011/Sentence
V V