DCCC948/2025

### 案件基本資料 - 案件名稱：香港特別行政區 v 葉偉良 - 法院：區域法院 (DC) - 法官：練錦鴻 - 判決日期：2025年12月24日 ### 案情摘要 被告人於2025年4月14日早上在深水埗北河街市一菜檔外，利用背囊遮掩雙手，趁隙拉開受害人腰包拉鍊並盜走現金13,000元。被告於同日下午被捕，身上搜獲3,500元現金。被告就一項盜竊罪認罪並承認案情。 ### 核心法律爭議 本案之核心 legal issue 在於量刑 (sentencing)。法庭需決定在被告為慣犯且犯案手法具預謀的情況下，應如何調整量刑基數 (starting point)。辯方提出被告年事已高、對行為懊悔及新任祖父等求情理據以尋求減刑。 ### 判決理由 法官首先引用上訴庭量刑指引，初犯者審訊後定罪之基數為12至15個月。但考慮到本案存在嚴重情況 (aggravating factors)：(1) 犯案地點人煙稠密且擠逼；(2) 被告使用道具遮掩，顯示有備而來；(3) 涉案金額較高。此外，被告有極其豐富的刑事紀錄（26次紀錄，23項涉及盜竊），且在2024年因扒竊被判監後釋放不久即再犯，屬慣犯。因此，法官將基數提高至24個月，並因上述嚴重因素各加刑6個月，總基數達42個月，最後因認罪而下調。 ### 引用案例與條文 引用上訴庭關於扒竊罪的量刑指引 (Sentencing guidelines of the Court of Appeal)。 ### 裁決與命令 被告被裁定盜竊罪成立。法官最終判處被告監禁28個月。 ### 判決啟示 本案強調了對於「釋放後不久再犯」 (re-offending shortly after release) 以及「職業扒竊手法」的嚴厲打擊。即使被告提出家庭因素或年齡等求情理據，但在面對極高頻率的同類罪行紀錄時，其減刑效力極低。 --- ### 免責聲明 本摘要由人工智能自動生成，內容可能存在錯誤或遺漏，僅供參考，不構成法律意見。如需法律建議，請諮詢合資格律師。### Case Details - Case Name: HKSAR v Yip Wai Leung - Court: District Court (DC) - Judge: Luen Kam Hung - Date of Judgment: 24 December 2025 ### Factual Background On 14 April 2025, the defendant stole HK$13,000 in cash from a victim's waist bag at a vegetable stall in North River Street Market, Sham Shui Po. He used a backpack to conceal his hands during the act. He was arrested later that day with HK$3,500 in cash. The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of theft. ### Key Legal Issues The primary legal issue was the determination of an appropriate sentence. The court had to balance the standard sentencing guidelines for theft against significant aggravating factors, including the defendant's extensive criminal record and the premeditated nature of the crime, while considering the defense's pleas for leniency based on personal circumstances. ### Ratio Decidendi The judge applied the Court of Appeal's sentencing guidelines, noting a starting point of 12-15 months for first-time offenders. However, the starting point was increased to 24 months due to aggravating factors: the crowded location, the use of a prop for concealment, and the substantial amount stolen. Further increments of 6 months each were added because the defendant is a habitual offender with 26 prior convictions (23 for theft) and re-offended shortly after a previous prison sentence for a similar crime. The total starting point of 42 months was then reduced due to the guilty plea. ### Key Precedents & Statutes Sentencing guidelines of the Court of Appeal regarding pickpocketing/theft. ### Decision & Orders The defendant was convicted of theft and sentenced to 28 months' imprisonment. ### Key Takeaways The judgment underscores the court's strict approach toward habitual offenders who commit the same offense shortly after release. It demonstrates that personal mitigation (e.g., age, family status) carries limited weight when weighed against a persistent pattern of criminal conduct. --- ### Disclaimer This summary is AI-generated and may contain errors or omissions. It is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a qualified lawyer for professional legal advice.