SIN CHAN-KWONG v. THE QUEEN

CACC001083/1979

IN THE SUPREME COURT	Criminal Appeal
	1979 No. 1083

BETWEEN
	SIN Chan-kwong	Appellant
	AND
	THE QUEEN	Respondent

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

Coram: Huggins, J.A.

Date of Judgment: 11 December 1979

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The Appellant comes to this court suggesting that he did not know what was going on in the magistrate's court. I do not believe that: it was made very clear to him what was going on. He was given every opportunity to speak in his defence. He admitted having committed robbery and in mitigation said that he had no money, that was why he did it and that he was not a drug addict. Those were all matters taken into account by the learned magistrate. He further took into account the nature of the offence - no weapon was used, no one was assaulted and there was no accomplice.

2. The Appellant had no previous conviction for an offence of dishonesty: he merely had one previous conviction for an assault occasioning actual bodily harm, a very recent offence for which he was fined $300. He is 28 years old and, therefore, there is no other course open by way of detention centre or training centre. I have no doubt that a sentence of imprisonment was a proper sentence. Nevertheless, it seems to me - and counsel for the Crown tends to agree with me - that the sentence was on the high side. Although nothing that the Appellant has said to me persuades me that I ought to interfere, I think that this is a case where I will be justified in reducing the sentence from 15 months to one of 9 months. I do so because this Appellant has no previous conviction for dishonesty and for all the other reasons which induced the magistrate to pass the sentence which he did, and, in addition, by reason of the fact that this is the Appellant's first sentence of imprisonment. The appeal is allowed and the sentence of 9 months' imprisonment is substituted.

 

11th December 1979.