HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1976

TSANG SHING-TAT v. THE QUEEN

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR10/1992THE QUEEN v. WONG MOK DIN
  • CAAR11/1986THE QUEEN v. CHUNG WAI-YIU
  • CAAR12/1986THE QUEEN v. HSU SAI-MAN AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR15/1986THE QUEEN v. WU KAM MING AND OTHERS
  • CAAR15/1987THE QUEEN v. LEUNG WING FAI
  • CAAR16/1987THE QUEEN v. PANG CHEUNG KIM
  • CAAR19/1986THE QUEEN v. CHAN CHI MAN
  • CAAR22/1986THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-CHI
  • CAAR23/1986THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS
  • CAAR4/1986THE QUEEN v. LY XUONG THANH
  • CAAR5/1986THE QUEEN v. YEUNG KAM-WAH (D1) AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR8/1986THE QUEEN v. ALBERT STANLEY MALIA
  • CAAR9/1986THE QUEEN v. CHU TAI WAI AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR9/1989THE QUEEN v. CHAN KOON KWOK ARTHUR
  • CACC1000/1976LAI FAT v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC1000/1983THE QUEEN v. LEE HEI KEUNG
  • CACC1001/1979LAW WAI-MING AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1972LIU KAM-MAN v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1973LO WAI KEUNG v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1977TAM YUK-MUI (F) v. THE QUEEN
1992-EN-1976-04-07

TSANG SHING-TAT v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000224/1976

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL1976 No. 224
 (Criminal)

 

BETWEEN:  
 TSANG Shing-tatAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J., Huggins & Pickering, JJ.A.

Date of Judgment: 7th April, 1976.

 

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

 

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to one offence of robbery and was sentenced to 3 ½ years' imprisonment. He appeals against his sentence.

2. At about 4.30 in the afternoon of the 10th January of this year, when the victim was cleaning his employer's car in the street, the appellant approached him with some query. The defendant left but came back again to the victim and threatened him with a knife and demanded some money. As the victim was frightened he handed over $140 in cash, his watch and a pen. The appellant then jumped on a bi-cycle which he had left nearby and tried to escape. He was hotly pursued by the victim, and other members of the public joined in and he was caught. All that he had stolen was recovered.

3. The appellant told the court that he was, at that time, addicted to drugs and wanted the money to satisfy his addiction.

4. The appellant is only 18 years of age and has a clear record, and we note the peculiar amateur quality of this crime. We think that, in the circumstances, taking into consideration his youth and clear record, we can safely reduce the sentence of 3 ½ years' imprisonment to one of 2 ½ years. His appeal is therefore allowed to this extent.

 

 

 (Geoffrey Briggs)
 President.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person.

Graham for crown.