HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal2011

HKSAR v. BATBAATAR, DAVGASUMBEREL

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR11/1997HKSAR v. YIP CHI TUNG
  • CAAR1/1998HKSAR v. LING VERONICA
  • CAAR12/1996HKSAR v. WONG KWONG YICK
  • CAAR6/1998HKSAR v. LAU SHIU KONG AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR6/2012HKSAR v. LEUNG KWOK CHI
  • CAAR9/2001HKSAR v. WONG TO LEUNG
  • CACC100/1997HKSAR v. YU HON CHUN
  • CACC100/1999HKSAR v. LAM CHI KIN
  • CACC100/2000HKSAR v. SHING KUEN KIN
  • CACC100/2001HKSAR v. OU YANG MING CHYUAN
  • CACC100/2002HKSAR v. CHAN LAI SING AND ANOTHER
  • CACC100/2003HKSAR v. CHENG CHONG SHING
  • CACC100/2022HKSAR v. LIMBU PRASHANT
  • CACC101/1997HKSAR v. YIU KENNETH LIK KIN
  • CACC101/2001HKSAR v. LEUNG KWAI PING
  • CACC101/2021HKSAR v. WONG CHI FUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/1997HKSAR v. MAN KAM SHING
  • CACC10/1998HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN TAK
  • CACC10/2001HKSAR v. TAM KWAI KEUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/2002HKSAR v. WONG WAN SHAN
76868-EN-2011-05-27

HKSAR v. BATBAATAR, DAVGASUMBEREL

HTML content

HCMA267/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 267/2011

(ON APPEAL FROM ESCC NO. 1289 OF 2011)

____________________

BETWEEN

 HKSARRespondent

and

 BATBAATAR, DAVGASUMBERELAppellant

____________________

Before: The Honourable Mr Justice Line in Court

Date of Hearing: 27 May 2011

Date of Judgment: 27 May 2011

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

 

1.  This is an appeal against a sentence of 8 months’ imprisonment imposed for an offence of theft.  It was a pick-pocketing case.  It occurred in Central during the busy lunch hour when the Appellant picked the pocket of woman and removed her wallet.

2.  The Magistrate took a starting point of 12 months.  The guideline sentence of 12 to 15 months, after trial, is well established here in Hong Kong as is the one-third discount for the plea of guilty.  There is nothing wrong with the sentence of 8 months’ imprisonment.

3.  The only matter that the Appellant urged upon me today was to tell me that he had a wife and a one-year-old daughter. Whilst he asks very nicely for a reduction in his sentence, I am afraid he has demonstrated no ground to interfere.  My view is the same as the Magistrate’s. The appeal is dismissed.

(P Line)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
of the High Court

Ms Rosaline Leung, Senior Public Prosecutor, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent

Appellant: Batbaatar Davgasumberel, in person