THE QUEEN v. CHEUNG WAI KEUNG

CACC000403/1985

In the Court of Appeal

Criminal Appeal No. 403 of 1985

____________

BETWEEN

	THE QUEEN	Respondent
	and
	CHEUNG WAI KEUNG	Appellant

____________

Coram: Hon. Li V-P., Kempster J.A. & Power J. in Court

Date of Hearing: 6th December 1985

Date of Delivery of Judgment: 6th December 1985

___________

JUDGMENT

___________

 

Power, J.

1. Appellant, in this matter you pleaded guilty to 3 offences of robbery and one of possession of an offensive weapon in a public place. You were sentenced to imprisonment on those charges in a total of 5 years. You appeared before this Court today and through your Counsel suggested that you were dealt with too severely given all of the circumstances that applied in your case. It must be made clear that offences of the type to which you pleaded guilty will, in almost all circumstances, be visited with a substantial term of imprisonment. Even when there is a plea of guilty, even when a person is of young age, even when a person shows remorse and even when he has a previous good character, the Courts, nonetheless, take the view that those offences are so grave, they constitute such a menace to society generally that they must be visited with a substantial term of imprisonment. Your Counsel has argued, however, that there are more circumstances than the four which I just outlined, that not only did you plead guilty, not only are you young, not only are you showing remorse and have had previous good character but also that you have a family background of a nature to which the Court must give heed when considering the appropriate sentence to impose. Your Counsel has also said that the Court should pay particular attention to the Training Centre Reports and the Probation Report and should note that the Probation Officer, despite the seriousness of the offences was, nonetheless, prepared, because he felt you were a suitable subject for probation, to have you placed upon probation under his supervision. Your family circumstances are tragic ones but they would not, in my view, justify any interference with your sentence standing alone. However, this Court is satisfied that when all of the circumstances are considered, the sentence of 5 years imprisonment was not a proper one. We are satisfied given the real remorse you have shown and the real possibility of reformation that the appropriate sentence would have been an order that you be detained in a Training Centre and we therefore do vary these sentences of 5 years and substituted them with an order that you be placed in a Training Centre.

2. We note with approval that your family is receiving social assistance and indicated the hope that such an assistance will be forthcoming in the future.

(N.P. Power) Judge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr. Cross (D.P.P.) for the Crown

Mr. Plowman (D.L.A.) for the Appellant