Zhou Haiming and Luo Jianguo v Public Prosecutor: Casino Theft Conspiracy and CDSA Charges

Zhou Haiming and Luo Jianguo, both People's Republic of China nationals, appealed against the District Judge's decision regarding their sentences for engaging in a criminal conspiracy to commit theft in Singapore casinos and removing proceeds of criminal activity from the jurisdiction. The High Court enhanced the sentences for the criminal conspiracy charge to 24 months' imprisonment, while dismissing the offenders' appeals. The sentences for the criminal conspiracy charge and the CDSA charge were ordered to run concurrently.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Prosecution's appeals allowed in part; offenders' appeals dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Zhou Haiming and Luo Jianguo appealed against their sentence for conspiring to steal casino chips. The High Court enhanced their sentences for the theft conspiracy.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorRespondent, AppellantGovernment AgencyAppeal allowed in partPartial
Alexander Woon of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Joshua Lai of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Zhou HaimingAppellant, RespondentIndividualAppeal dismissedLost
Chong Yi Mei of Law Society of Singapore
Luo JianguoAppellant, RespondentIndividualAppeal dismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
See Kee OonJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Alexander WoonAttorney-General’s Chambers
Joshua LaiAttorney-General’s Chambers
Chong Yi MeiLaw Society of Singapore
Justin TanTrident Law Corporation

4. Facts

  1. Zhou and Luo conspired with Huang to steal casino chips.
  2. They stole chips worth S$100,225 from over 60 victims on 284 occasions.
  3. They attempted to steal another S$7,925 worth of chips on 13 occasions.
  4. Zhou and Luo left Singapore with some of the stolen money.
  5. They returned to Singapore to commit further thefts and were arrested.
  6. They admitted the money they carried was from the earlier thefts.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Zhou Haiming v Public Prosecutor and other appeals, , [2017] SGHC 40

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Zhou and Luo arrived in Singapore
Zhou and Luo met Huang at the casino at Marina Bay Sands
Zhou, Luo and Huang stole casino chips
Zhou, Luo and Huang stole casino chips
Zhou and Luo left Singapore to return to China
Zhou and Luo returned to Singapore and were arrested
Zhou and Luo pleaded guilty to the charges
Oral remarks delivered
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Criminal Conspiracy to Commit Theft
    • Outcome: The High Court enhanced the sentences for the criminal conspiracy charge to 24 months’ imprisonment.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Removing Proceeds of Criminal Activity from Jurisdiction
    • Outcome: The sentence of two weeks’ imprisonment for the CDSA charges was not the subject of any of the appeals before the High Court. The sentence for the criminal conspiracy charge was to run concurrently with that for the CDSA charge.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Sentencing Principles
    • Outcome: The High Court considered the aggravating and mitigating factors in determining the appropriate sentence, emphasizing the importance of general and specific deterrence.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Imprisonment

9. Cause of Actions

  • Criminal Conspiracy to Commit Theft
  • Removing Proceeds of Criminal Activity from Jurisdiction

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Appeals

11. Industries

  • Gambling

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Lim Ying Ying Luciana v Public Prosecutor and another appealHigh CourtYes[2016] 4 SLR 1220SingaporeCited regarding the relationship between the amount stolen and the sentence imposed.
Public Prosecutor v Fernando Payagala Waduge Malitha KumarHigh CourtYes[2007] 2 SLR(R) 334SingaporeCited for the observations of the High Court regarding the need for general deterrence and the imposition of a higher sentence for criminal conspiracy charges.
Fricker Oliver v Public Prosecutor and another appeal and another matterHigh CourtYes[2011] 1 SLR 84SingaporeCited for the observations of the High Court regarding the need for general deterrence and the imposition of a higher sentence for criminal conspiracy charges.
Lim Seng Soon v Public ProsecutorHigh CourtYes[2015] 1 SLR 1195SingaporeCited regarding the charges under the CDSA where the appellant had routed benefits of his crime out of Singapore using an offshore bank account were a sophisticated act of crime that reflected a separate act of criminality from the cheating charge that he had also been found guilty of.
Mohamed Shouffee bin Adam v Public ProsecutorHigh CourtYes[2014] 2 SLR 998SingaporeCited regarding the determination as to whether the offences fall within the one transaction rule must be undertaken as a matter of common sense.
Janardana Jayasankarr v Public ProsecutorHigh CourtYes[2016] 4 SLR 1288SingaporeCited regarding sentencing precedents without grounds or explanations should bear little, if any, weight because they are unreasoned.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 379 read with s 120BSingapore
Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act (Cap 65A, 2000 Rev Ed) s 47(1)(b), and punishable under s 47(6)(a)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Casino chips
  • Theft
  • Criminal conspiracy
  • Proceeds of criminal activity
  • Deterrence
  • Transnational element

15.2 Keywords

  • Casino theft
  • Criminal conspiracy
  • Singapore
  • CDSA
  • Sentencing
  • Appeal

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Sentencing
  • Casino Crime