HKSAR v. LIU CHING SHAN

DCCC 521/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 521 OF 2013

———————-

HKSAR
v
Liu Ching-shan
———————-

Before: HH Judge S D’Almada Remedios

Date: 12 July 2013 at 10.52 am

Present: Miss Sheroy Tam, PP, of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Ching King Tat, instructed by Alfred Lam, Keung & Ko, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant

Offence: Burglary (入屋犯法罪)

———————

Reasons for Sentence

———————

1. Defendant, you pleaded guilty to a charge of burglary, contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance.

2. On 21 April 2013, at about 5.30 am, you entered as a trespasser the ground floor of a building at No. 164 Yee Kuk Street. At thebottom of this building was a staircase which the victim who lived on the 4th floor used as a storeroom. It was enclosed with aniron gate which was locked by a metal chain and a padlock. You stole from there various items which included a folding bed, a transformer,a printer, a headphone, fan heater, a decoder, a box and a bag. The owner of the goods had heard some noises at the time. Whenhe looked outside he saw you. He therefore called the police. The police arrived soon after and he had shouted from his premisesthat it was you who was burgling his premises. You were then intercepted. The stolen property was found near you in the rear lane.

3. It is not disputed by the prosecution and the defence that the area to which you had entered as a trespasser was a storeroom andthus not domestic premises.

4. Mr Ching, your solicitor, has made full and thorough mitigation on your behalf today. I have taken into account all that he hashad to say in mitigation. You are 39 years of age and have 11 previous convictions of which eight are related to theft and one similarto burglary. You are single and live on CSSA. Your strongest mitigating factor is of course your plea of guilty.

5. Mr Ching has correctly set out that the sentence to be imposed upon you is a sentence in relation to that of burglary of non-domesticpremises. I accept there are no aggravating factors in this case and that the items stolen were of little or no monetary or necessarilysentimental value.

6. In taking into account this was a burglary of a non-domestic premises, defendant, had I convicted you after trial I would have takena starting point of 30 months’ imprisonment. However, you have pleaded guilty and full credit must be given for your plea andthat term shall be reduced to 20 months’ imprisonment, which is 1 year 8 months to which you shall be so sentenced.

(S. D’Almada Remedios)
District Judge