Choo Kok Hwee v PP: Enhanced Sentencing for Second DUI Offence under Road Traffic Act
Choo Kok Hwee appealed to the High Court against the sentence imposed by the District Judge for two charges of driving under the influence of drink under s 67(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act. The High Court, presided over by Choo Han Teck J, dismissed the appeal, finding that the District Judge was correct in counting the appellant's 1988 conviction as a first conviction for enhanced sentencing and that a jail term was mandatory for a second offender under s 67(1). The court also found that the District Judge had not failed to accord sufficient weight to the appellant's decision to plead guilty and his cooperation with the authorities.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Choo Kok Hwee appealed against his sentence for driving under the influence, arguing against enhanced sentencing. The High Court dismissed the appeal.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Choo Kok Hwee | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | S K Kumar |
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Carene Poh, Crystal Tan |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| S K Kumar | S K Kumar Law Practice LLP |
| Carene Poh | Attorney-General's Chambers |
| Crystal Tan | Attorney-General's Chambers |
4. Facts
- On 2 September 2012, the appellant was driving his car and involved in a collision at Woodlands Checkpoint.
- A police officer smelled alcohol on the appellant’s breath.
- The appellant’s breath was found to contain 61 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath.
- On 23 May 2013, the appellant drove his car along Jalan Bukit Merah in an unsteady manner.
- The appellant’s breath was found to contain 75 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath.
- The appellant pleaded guilty to two charges of driving under the influence of drink and one charge of driving without due care and attention.
- The appellant had a prior conviction for driving under the influence of drink on 31 March 1988.
5. Formal Citations
- Choo Kok Hwee v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate's Appeal No 305 of 2013, [2014] SGHC 126
- PP v Choo Kok Hwee, , [2014] SGDC 15
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellant was driving his car and involved in a collision at Woodlands Checkpoint. | |
| Appellant drove his car along Jalan Bukit Merah. | |
| Appellant pleaded guilty to two charges of driving under the influence of drink and one charge of driving without due care and attention before the District Judge. | |
| Appellant was previously convicted for one count of driving under the influence of drink. | |
| High Court dismissed the appeal. |
7. Legal Issues
- Enhanced Sentencing
- Outcome: The court held that the District Judge was correct to count the appellant's 1988 conviction as a first conviction for the purpose of enhanced sentencing under s 67(1) of the RTA.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2013] 4 SLR 1139
- [2001] 2 SLR(R) 384
- [1998] 3 SLR(R) 84
- [1992] 1 SLR(R) 672
- [2009] 3 SLR(R) 423
- Mandatory Imprisonment
- Outcome: The court held that a jail term was mandatory for a second offender under s 67(1).
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1998] 3 SLR(R) 84
- [1992] 1 SLR(R) 672
- [2009] 3 SLR(R) 423
- Mitigating Factors
- Outcome: The court found that the District Judge had not failed to accord sufficient weight to the appellant's decision to plead guilty and his cooperation with the authorities.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1999] 1 SLR(R) 1022
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Driving Under the Influence of Drink
- Driving Without Due Care and Attention
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Traffic Violations
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edwin s/o Suse Nathen v PP | High Court | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 1139 | Singapore | Cited to highlight the differences between the two limbs of s 67(1) of the RTA in the context of considering the appropriate sentence to be imposed for a first offender under s 67(1)(b). |
| Silvalingam Sinnasamy v PP | High Court | Yes | [2001] 2 SLR(R) 384 | Singapore | Held that s 67(1) does not draw a distinction between s 67(1)(a) and s 67(1)(b) for the purposes of enhanced penalties for second-time offenders. |
| PP v Lee Soon Lee Vincent | High Court | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR(R) 84 | Singapore | Dealt with the question of whether a jail term is mandatory for a second offender under s 67(1) and answered it in the affirmative. |
| PP v Tan Teck Hin | Court of Criminal Appeal | Yes | [1992] 1 SLR(R) 672 | Singapore | Observed that, under s 67(1) of the Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, 1985 Rev Ed), repeat offenders were subject to both a fine and a mandatory term of imprisonment. |
| Chong Pit Khai v PP | High Court | Yes | [2009] 3 SLR(R) 423 | Singapore | Considered whether repeat offenders under s 67(1) were liable to mandatory imprisonment, but did not express a conclusive view on the matter. |
| PP v Choo Kok Hwee | District Court | Yes | [2014] SGDC 15 | Singapore | The District Judge's decision that was being appealed. |
| PP v Tan Fook Sum | High Court | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR(R) 1022 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there is no mitigation value in a plea of guilty when the evidence is incontrovertible. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, 2004 Rev Ed) s 67(1)(b) | Singapore |
| Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, 2004 Rev Ed) s 72(1) | Singapore |
| Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, 2004 Rev Ed) s 65(a) | Singapore |
| Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, 1985 Rev Ed) s 67(1) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Driving Under the Influence
- Enhanced Sentencing
- Mandatory Imprisonment
- Road Traffic Act
- Second Offender
- Breath Alcohol Content
- Mitigating Factors
15.2 Keywords
- driving under influence
- enhanced sentencing
- mandatory imprisonment
- road traffic act
- singapore
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Road Traffic Law
- Sentencing
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Road Traffic Law
- Sentencing