WONG SHU v. THE QUEEN
HTML content
CACC000407/1971
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 407 OF 1971
-----------------
| BETWEEN | ||
| WONG SHU | Appellant | |
| and | ||
| THE QUEEN | Respondent |
-----------------
Coram: Pickering, J.
Date of Judgment: 3rd August, 1971.
-----------------
JUDGMENT
-----------------
1. The appellant pleaded guilty to a charge of Going Equipped for Stealing and was sentenced to 9 months' imprisonment. He now appeals against that sentence.
2. In his Statement of Findings the learned Magistrate said:
"Following the recent position (sic) of the English Court of Appeal in the case of R. v. Person I considered a sentence of nine months' imprisonment appropriate for this offence and sentenced the appellant accordingly".
In the case of Person(1) the appellant had pleaded guilty at a magistrate's court to having in his possession a knife, a torch and a pair of gloves for use in connection with burglary and had been sentenced to 9 months' imprisonment. The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) said:
"The existence of the offence of carrying housebreaking implements is a very important piece of preventive justice, and it will lose its undoubted importance and effect unless it is clearly recognised that it is an offence which will attract a significant sentence."
The court refuse to interfere with the sentence of 9 months' imprisonment.
3. The dictum of the Court of Appeal is no doubt just as true in Hong Kong as it is in the United Kingdom but in Hong Kong the "significant sentence" has come to be regarded as standing in the region of 6 months rather than 9 months (see HO Shek-ping v. The Queen Criminal Appeal 395 of 1971 and MOK Wing-luk v. The Queen Criminal Appeal no. 287 of 1971).
4. It is in an effort to secure uniformity of sentencing that I allow the appeal to the extent that the sentence of 9 months' imprisonment is reduced to one of 6 months.
Representation:
Appellant in person.
Lucas, S.C.C., for Crown.
(1) 1969 C.A.R. 640