LEE SAI YEUNG v. THE QUEEN

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 77 OF 1973

________________________

________________________

________________________

JUDGMENT

________________________

Huggins, J. :

1.  This is an appeal against sentence. The Appellant was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment for robbery and two years’ imprisonment concurrent on each of two wounding charges. Application for leave was granted by the single judge, who made it clear that in his opinion the sentences imposed for these sentences were, in isolation, entirely proper, but he thought that this court should consider whether the addition of this over all sentence of four years to an existing term of three and a half years was appropriate.

2.  The Appellant entered a residential flat through an unlocked door. He threatened the five occupants with what is described as “an imitation firearm”. As the learned judge said in the court below, it is a very realistic imitation - if it is entirely imitation. The Appellant also had a knife. He was wearing a white cloth round his face and, having driven the occupants into a bedroom and covered them with a blanket, he ransacked the premises. While he was doing this two of the occupants tried to grapple with him. One received multiple cut wounds on his right arm, his leg and his chest. Another was stabbed in the chest. We entirely agree with the single judge that for such offences the sentences which were passed were in themselves entirely proper.

3.  The previous sentence of three and a half years was imposed for robbery and, at the same time, there were concurrent sentences of one year’s imprisonment for possession of an offensive weapon, three months for possession of an instrument fit for an unlawful purpose, one year for taking a conveyance without authority and three years for burglary. Briefly the robbery was a smash and grab raid upon a watch shop, which was open for business. The Appellant was carrying a knife. There was an attempt to arrest him and he threatened the shop staff with the knife. He escaped in a car which he had taken without authority and, when he was stopped, he was found to have a screw driver and some other instrument in the bag which he had been carrying. The final charge was related to a breaking into a locked office in Sutherland House.

4.  Although only about 24 years of age the Appellant has an appalling record involving robberies, house breakings, woundings and throwing corrosive fluid. The over all sentences imposed are indeed heavy but the learned judge who imposed the sentences now appealed against was aware of the other sentences and took them into account. We think that the Appellant is a dangerous young man and we see no ground upon which we can interfere.

5.  His appeal is dismissed.

4th May 1973.