25 Apr 2019
香港特別行政區 訴 楊志釗及另一人
- Citation
- [2019] HKCFI 966
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA17/2019
The judge accepted credible evidence that the units were owned/managed (not abandoned), appellants were present inside as trespassers equipped with tools and engaged in acts consistent with stealing; their accounts were implausible or inconsistent; therefore the only irresistible inference is that they entered with intent to steal, supporting convictions under s.11(1)(a) Cap.210; the 15‑month sentence for the second appellant was within the appropriate range given reduction from a residential starting point and his prior convictions.