HKSAR v. LAU MAN CHI

CAC C 326/2018

[2019] HKCA 139

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 326 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM DCCC NO. 474 OF 2018)

_______________________

_______________________

_______________________

D E C I S I O N

_______________________

1.  The applicant pleaded guilty to a charge of burglary and was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.  She had applied for leave to appeal against sentence and she now seeks bail pending appeal.

2.  Whilst the judge described the applicant as an opportunist burglar, it was not a case whereby a defendant entered a deserted premises and stole therein properties that had been abandoned or had little value as in the case of HKSAR v Chau Man Ying (CACC 439/2011) and HKSAR v Kwok Wing Kam (CACC 394/2010).  In Kwok Wing Kam the defendant only stole a packet of lemon tea.

3.  Unlike the case of HKSAR v Law Tin Yam (CACC 258/2010), the premises in question, being occupied, was actually locked up by the victim before he went to work.  The lock was prized open and the applicant, as a trespasser, entered and ransacked the premises and stole therein a large number of valuable items, including wooden drawer, a video game player, a gold coin, two gold rings, one jade bracelet with three jade pendants, 5 mobile phones valued at $2000 and cash.

4.  Whilst the offence might not have been carefully planned and executed, the judge’s description of the applicant as an opportunist burglar must be understood in its proper context.

5.  In my view, far from being a manifestly excessive sentence, the 18 months’ imprisonment imposed on the applicant is a lenient one with no room for any reduction.

6.  The proposed application for leave to appeal has no chance of success.  That being the case, there is no basis upon which I can grant the applicant bail pending appeal.

7.  The application is dismissed.