A A
DCCC 1130/2012
B B
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
C CRIMINAL CASE NO 1130 OF 2012 C
D
---------------------- D
HKSAR
E E
v
F Cheung Tzs-kwai F
G ---------------------- G
Before: HH Judge Woodcock
H Date: 29 January 2013 at 3.38 pm H
Present: Mr Kwong Cho-yau, Simon, PP, of the Department of
Justice, for HKSAR
I Mr Tse Wing-lok, Dennis, of Christine M Koo & Ip, I
assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
J defendant J
Offence: (1)-(8) Burglary (入屋犯法罪)
(10) Remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of
K the Director of Immigration after having landed K
unlawfully in Hong Kong (在香港非法入境後未得入境事務
L 處處長授權而留在香港) L
---------------------
M Reasons for Sentence M
N
--------------------- N
1. Defendant has pleaded guilty today to nine charges,
O O
the first eight charges - (1) to (8) - are burglary offences
contract to Section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance,
P P
Cap. 210. The defendant has also pleaded guilty to Charge 10 on
Q the charge sheet, which is remaining in Hong Kong without the Q
authority of the Director of Immigration after having landed
R unlawfully in Hong Kong contrary to Section 38(1)(b) of the R
Immigration Ordinance Cap.115.
S S
2. Despite the multitude of offences the facts are
T T
straightforward. Between 24 May 2012 and 6 June 2012, the
defendant committed eight domestic burglaries all in the Pat
U U
Heung area of the New Territories. All occupants of these
CRT25/29.1.2013/SR 1 DCCC 1130/2012/Sentence
V V
A A
domestic premises were out at the time when the defendant and a
wanted person, according to the defendant, broke in and stole
B B
valuables. That included cash, jewellery, mobile phones as well
C as food and drink. C
D 3. The defendant was arrested acting suspiciously in the D
same area on 7 June and was, in fact, caught red handed with
E E
many stolen items from the many burglaries in his possession.
There was a wanted person who was with the defendant at the time
F F
but he managed to escape from the police. Many of the items
G were, in fact recovered. G
H 4. The defendant made a full and frank admission to the H
police admitting all eight burglaries. He also admitted to the
I I
police that he had entered Hong Kong illegally, swimming over
with a friend. He explained that he had come to find work, I
J J
presume to earn some money, but having failed, resorted to
K
stealing food and other valuables. K
L 5. The defendant is a 40 year old male with little formal L
education. He is single and has explained that he indebted to a
M friend who lent him money to fund a duck farm business. The M
business unfortunately failed and the money must be repaid which
N N
is why he felt he had no choice but to come back to Hong Kong
illegally and try and find a way to earn money to repay this
O O
debt. I say “come back to Hong Kong illegally” because he has
P many previous convictions in Hong Kong. He has been before the P
courts on five occasions since 1994. His last conviction was in
Q 2007. Amongst his record he has previous convictions for Q
burglaries, robbery and theft as well as five counts of
R R
remaining in Hong Kong illegally.
S S
6. The defendant’s best mitigation today is his plea of
T guilty. Offences of this nature, be it burglary or remaining T
illegally in Hong Kong have guidelines this court will follow.
U Normally a burglary of a domestic premise where there is no U
CRT25/29.1.2013/SR 2 DCCC 1130/2012/Sentence
V V
A A
aggravating or mitigating factors will attract a starting point
of 3 years’ imprisonment. I can find, in this case, no
B B
particular aggravating or mitigating factors. The single charge
C of illegally remaining in Hong Kong will attract, after plea for C
a 1st offence, a 15 month term of imprisonment following the
D authority of R v So Man King, [1989] 1 HKLR, 142. There is also D
ample authority from the Court of Appeal that sentences for
E E
illegally remaining in Hong Kong should run consecutively to any
other offences committed by the same defendant.
F F
G 7. I have considered the defendant’s plea, previous G
convictions, the facts of each charge and the mitigation put
H forward. I have also considered the fact that there were eight H
counts of burglary and it would not be appropriate to make all
I I
these charges concurrent. The sentences must reflect the
multitude of offences even though similar with the totality
J J
principle in mind. I have also taken into account the fact that
K
charges 4, 5 and 6 were committed on the same day. K
L 8. Defendant, please stand up. Therefore, after careful L
consideration I will make for each charge 1 to 8, a starting
M point of 3 years - I find a starting point of 3 years M
appropriate. The defendant is entitled to a discount of 1 year
N N
for his plea of guilty. So therefore, for Charges 1 to 8 the
defendant is sentenced to two years’ imprisonment.
O O
P 9. However, for Charge 2, I will make 2 months of this 2 P
years consecutive to Charge 1. For Charge 3 I make 2 months of
Q the 2 year sentence consecutive to Charge 1. For Charge 4 I also Q
make 2 months of the 2 year sentence consecutive to Charge 1.
R R
For Charges 5 and 6 I will make wholly concurrent to Charge 1.
For Charges 7, I make 2 months of the 2 year sentence
S S
consecutive to charge 1. For Charge 8 I also make 2 months of
T the 2 year sentence consecutive to Charge 1. The balance of the T
sentences will be served concurrently. Where Charges 1 to 8 is
U U
CRT25/29.1.2013/SR 3 DCCC 1130/2012/Sentence
V V
A A
concerned that would mean a total sentence of 2 years and 10
months.
B B
C 10. Where the 10th Charge is concerned according to the C
established authority and the fact the defendant has committed
D this offence on a number of occasions, I sentence the defendant D
to 18 months’ imprisonment for Charge 10.
E E
11. I am aware that if I make the 18 months wholly
F F
consecutive to the other charges the sentence will be
G substantial. After careful consideration, I intend to order six G
months of this 18 months to be served concurrently to Charge 1
H and the balance consecutively. Accordingly the defendant is H
sentenced to a total sentence of 3 years and 10 months.
I I
J J
K K
L A. J. Woodcock L
District Judge
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT25/29.1.2013/SR 4 DCCC 1130/2012/Sentence
V V