PP v Soo Cheow Wee: Sentencing of Mentally Disordered Offenders for Voluntarily Causing Hurt and Criminal Intimidation

In Public Prosecutor v Soo Cheow Wee, the High Court of Singapore heard cross-appeals regarding the sentencing of Soo Cheow Wee, an offender with a history of schizophrenia, polysubstance dependence, and psychosis, for charges including voluntarily causing hurt and criminal intimidation. The court, presided over by Sundaresh Menon CJ, dismissed the Prosecution's appeal and allowed in part Soo Cheow Wee's appeal, reducing the aggregate sentence from 33 to 27 months' imprisonment. The court considered the principles governing the sentencing of offenders with multiple mental conditions and the importance of psychiatric evidence.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

The Prosecution’s appeal was dismissed and the accused person’s appeal was allowed in part; the aggregate sentence was reduced from 33 months’ imprisonment to 27 months’ imprisonment.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court considered the sentencing of an offender with schizophrenia, polysubstance dependence, and psychosis for violent offenses.

1.7 Decision Date

30 July 2023

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Public Prosecutor	Appellant, Respondent	Government Agency	Appeal dismissed	Lost	Tai Wei Shyong, R Arvindren
Soo Cheow Wee	Respondent, Appellant	Individual	Appeal allowed in part	Partial	Chooi Jing Yen, Ng Yuan Siang

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Sundaresh Menon	Chief Justice	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Tai Wei Shyong	Attorney-General’s Chambers
R Arvindren	Attorney-General’s Chambers
Chooi Jing Yen	Eugene Thuraisingam LLP
Ng Yuan Siang	Eugene Thuraisingam LLP

4. Facts

The Appellant has a history of schizophrenia, polysubstance dependence, and psychosis.
The Appellant consumed cough syrup and diazepam without a prescription on 17 February 2022.
The Appellant heard a voice telling him to slash members of the public at random.
The Appellant slashed Mr Wong's hand with a knife, causing a traumatic laceration.
The Appellant charged towards a police officer while brandishing a knife.
The Appellant charged at Mr Goh with a knife.
The Appellant punched a police officer in 2019, causing tenderness and swelling.

5. Formal Citations

Public Prosecutor v Soo Cheow Wee and another appeal, Magistrate’s Appeal No 9220 of 2022, [2023] SGHC 204

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2019-06-09	Appellant punched a police officer at the Kampong Java Neighbourhood Police Centre.
2019-07-12	Dr Lim prepared an IMH report.
2019-12-12	Dr Lee prepared an IMH report.
2022-02-17	Appellant slashed Mr Wong's hand at Clementi Avenue 1.
2022-02-17	Appellant threatened a police officer at Clementi Avenue 5.
2022-02-17	Appellant threatened Mr Goh along Clementi Avenue 5.
2022-03-10	Dr Jason Lee prepared a forensic psychiatric evaluation.
2022-10-20	Ms Zain prepared a Corrective Training Suitability Report.
2023-04-18	Parties were heard.
2023-07-31	Judgment reserved.
2023-07-31	Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

Sentencing of Mentally Disordered Offenders
- Outcome: The court held that the Appellant's mental condition substantially impaired his responsibility and that this was a mitigating factor.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Impact of mental conditions on sentencing
  - Causal link between mental conditions and offending behavior
  - Offender's insight into mental conditions
- Related Cases:
  - [2020] 3 SLR 1097
  - [2008] 1 SLR 824
  - [2009] 3 SLR(R) 327
  - [2023] 1 SLR 222
  - [2014] 4 SLR 1287
  - [2018] 2 SLR 295
  - [2006] 4 SLR 124
  - [2003] 3 SLR(R) 178
  - [2016] 3 SLR 706
  - [2015] 3 SLR 222
  - [2020] 4 WLR 13
  - [2006] SGHC 168
  - [2006] 1 SLR(R) 530
  - [2007] SGHC 34
  - [2019] 5 SLR 887
  - [2018] 2 SLR 249
  - [2008] 2 SLR 684
  - [2007] 2 SLR 814
  - [2014] 3 SLR 299
  - [2019] 5 SLR 769
  - [2007] 4 SLR(R) 753
  - [2006] 4 SLR(R) 849
  - [2019] 5 SLR 526
  - [2023] SGHC 41
  - [2009] 1 SLR(R) 115
  - [2003] 1 SLR 167
  - [2021] 2 SLR 1169

8. Remedies Sought

Appeal against sentence
Reduction of imprisonment term

9. Cause of Actions

Voluntarily Causing Hurt by Dangerous Weapons or Means
Criminal Intimidation
Voluntarily Causing Hurt to Deter Public Servant from His Duty

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Law
Sentencing
Appeals

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Ng Soon Kim v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2020] 3 SLR 1097	Singapore	Cited for the three-step approach in sentencing for voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.
Public Prosecutor v Goh Lee Yin and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2008] 1 SLR 824	Singapore	Cited for the principle that sentencing of a mentally disordered offender requires balancing the need to protect society and the importance of rehabilitation.
Public Prosecutor v Aniza bte Essa	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2009] 3 SLR(R) 327	Singapore	Cited for the principle that a mental abnormality which makes an offender a danger to society but diminishes his moral culpability has countervailing effects on sentencing.
Roszaidi bin Osman v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2023] 1 SLR 222	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the court should consider the interaction between multiple mental conditions and whether a causal link can be established between the conditions and the commission of the offence.
Lim Ghim Peow v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2014] 4 SLR 1287	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the court should consider whether the overall circumstances are such as to diminish the offender’s culpability.
Public Prosecutor v Kong Peng Yee	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2018] 2 SLR 295	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the court should consider whether the overall circumstances are such as to diminish the offender’s culpability.
Chng Yew Chin v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2006] 4 SLR 124	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the court must limit itself to the medical evidence and guard against the influence of conjecture and sympathy.
Ng So Kuen Connie v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2003] 3 SLR(R) 178	Singapore	Cited for the principle that it is important that the psychiatric evidence be cogent and put forward by experts who are objective and impartial.
Phua Han Chuan Jeffery v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2016] 3 SLR 706	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the court should consider the synergistic manner in which different mental disorders may come together and operate on the accused person’s mind.
Public Prosecutor v Chong Hou En	High Court	Yes	[2015] 3 SLR 222	Singapore	Cited for the principle that where the offender’s mental conditions are established and are shown to be causally linked to the commission of the offence in some way, such a condition will typically reduce the offender’s culpability and be treated as a mitigating factor.
Regina v PS	English Court of Appeal	Yes	[2020] 4 WLR 13	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that the court ought to consider the extent to which the offender was aware of the consequences of his actions and choices.
Public Prosecutor v Mohammad Zam bin Abdul Rashid	High Court	Yes	[2006] SGHC 168	Singapore	Cited for the principle that considerations of rehabilitation may emerge where the accused person is unaware of the effect that his intoxication or substance abuse might have in precipitating symptoms of his conditions.
Goh Lee Yin v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2006] 1 SLR(R) 530	Singapore	Cited for the principle that where there is exceptional support and commitment on the part of the offender’s family and caregivers, the sentencing consideration of rehabilitation may be given greater weight.
Public Prosecutor v Lim Ah Liang	High Court	Yes	[2007] SGHC 34	Singapore	Cited for the principle that incapacitation aims to deal with severely mentally ill offenders who are not amenable to treatment by incapacitating them for substantial periods of time.
Kanagaratnam Nicholas Jens v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2019] 5 SLR 887	Singapore	Cited for the principle that where experts present their conclusions without also presenting the underlying evidence and the analytical process by which the conclusions are reached, the court will not be in a position to evaluate the soundness of the proffered views.
Public Prosecutor v Chia Kee Chen and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2018] 2 SLR 249	Singapore	Cited for the principle that where experts present their conclusions without also presenting the underlying evidence and the analytical process by which the conclusions are reached, the court will not be in a position to evaluate the soundness of the proffered views.
Public Prosecutor v Kwong Kok Hing	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2008] 2 SLR 684	Singapore	Cited for the principle that it is the duty of both the psychiatrist and counsel to ensure that the evaluation is accurate.
Public Prosecutor v Law Aik Meng	High Court	Yes	[2007] 2 SLR 814	Singapore	Cited for the principle that deterrence is usually appropriate where the crime is premeditated, but pathologically weak self-control, addictions, mental illnesses and compulsions are some of the elements that may constitute undeterribility and render deterrence futile.
Soh Meiyun v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2014] 3 SLR 299	Singapore	Cited for the principle that general deterrence will not be enhanced by meting out an imprisonment term to a patient suffering from a serious mental disorder which led to the commission of the offence.
Public Prosecutor v Low Ji Qing	High Court	Yes	[2019] 5 SLR 769	Singapore	Cited for the principle that even if weight is given to the need for incapacitation and protection of the public, this nonetheless must be assessed against the severity of the index offence.
Public Prosecutor v Loqmanul Hakim bin Buang	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2007] 4 SLR(R) 753	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the principle of retribution is premised on the notion that the offender’s wrongdoing deserves punishment.
Public Prosecutor v NF	High Court	Yes	[2006] 4 SLR(R) 849	Singapore	Cited for the principle that if an offender has committed a similar offence on previous and/or multiple occasions, a longer sentence would be justified to curb his criminal activity.
Low Song Chye v Public Prosecutor and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2019] 5 SLR 526	Singapore	Cited for the sentencing framework that applies to a first-time offender under s 323 who pleads guilty.
Haleem Bathusa bin Abdul Rahim v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2023] SGHC 41	Singapore	Cited for the approach to adjust the sentencing bands in the first stage of Low Song Chye to account for the amendments introduced by s 95 of the Criminal Law Reform Act 2019.
Wong Hoi Len v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2009] 1 SLR(R) 115	Singapore	Cited to distinguish the principle that those who voluntarily imbibe alcohol must bear full responsibility for their subsequent offending, as there was no evidence that the Appellant was sufficiently aware of his mental conditions or the effects of his substance abuse on his behavior.
Public Prosecutor v Aw Teck Hock	High Court	Yes	[2003] 1 SLR 167	Singapore	Cited to distinguish the principle that those who voluntarily imbibe alcohol must bear full responsibility for their subsequent offending, as there was no evidence that the Appellant was sufficiently aware of his mental conditions or the effects of his substance abuse on his behavior.
Miya Manik v Public Prosecutor and another matter	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2021] 2 SLR 1169	Singapore	Cited for the principle that where the offender’s mental conditions are established and are shown to be causally linked to the commission of the offence in some way, such a condition will typically reduce the offender’s culpability and be treated as a mitigating factor.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Penal Code 1871 Section 324	Singapore
Penal Code 1871 Section 506	Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) Section 332	Singapore
Misuse of Drugs Act 1973 (2020 Rev Ed)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Schizophrenia
Polysubstance dependence
Psychosis
Substance-induced psychosis
Criminal intimidation
Voluntarily causing hurt
Sentencing
Mitigating factor
Aggravating factor
Corrective training
Mental condition
Causal link
Impaired judgment
Impulse control

15.2 Keywords

Sentencing
Mental disorder
Criminal law
Singapore
Appeal
Voluntary hurt
Criminal intimidation

16. Subjects

Criminal Law
Sentencing
Mental Health Law

17. Areas of Law

Criminal Law
Sentencing
Criminal Procedure
Mental Health Law