JCY v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Reformative Training for Rioting & Sexual Offences

JCY appealed against the sentence of reformative training imposed by the District Court for rioting, sexually penetrating a minor, and theft-in-dwelling. The High Court, presided over by Justice Vincent Hoong, dismissed both the application to admit further evidence and the appeal against the sentence. The court found that deterrence and retribution were important sentencing considerations, and reformative training was more appropriate than probation.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Ex Tempore Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal against reformative training for rioting and sexual offences. The court dismissed the appeal, finding the sentence appropriate due to the seriousness of the offenses.

1.7 Decision Date

21 October 2024

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Public Prosecutor	Respondent	Government Agency	Appeal Upheld	Won	Terence Chua of Attorney-General’s Chambers Darren Ang of Attorney-General’s Chambers
JCY	Appellant, Applicant	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Lost	Josephus Tan of Invictus Law Corporation Cory Wong Guo Yean of Invictus Law Corporation Mohyong Shiteng Devlin of Invictus Law Corporation

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Vincent Hoong	Judge of the High Court	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Terence Chua	Attorney-General’s Chambers
Darren Ang	Attorney-General’s Chambers
Josephus Tan	Invictus Law Corporation
Cory Wong Guo Yean	Invictus Law Corporation
Mohyong Shiteng Devlin	Invictus Law Corporation

4. Facts

The Appellant pleaded guilty to six charges, including rioting, sexually penetrating a minor, and theft-in-dwelling.
Ten further charges were taken into consideration for sentencing, relating to rioting, sexually penetrating a minor, and voluntarily causing hurt.
The District Judge sentenced the Appellant to undergo reformative training for a minimum of six months.
The Appellant appealed against the sentence, arguing it was manifestly excessive.
The Appellant applied to admit further evidence, including restitution for theft, letters of support, and emails regarding his improved conduct.
The Appellant committed most of the offences while on police bail following his arrest for a rioting offence.
The Probation Report assessed the Appellant’s risk of re-offending as high compared to other male offenders.

5. Formal Citations

JCY v Public Prosecutor, , [2024] SGHC 267
Public Prosecutor v JCY, , [2024] SGDC 183
JCY v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate’s Appeal No 9130 of 2024/01, Magistrate’s Appeal No 9130 of 2024/01
JCY v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Motion No 60 of 2024, Criminal Motion No 60 of 2024

6. Timeline

Date	Event
1871-01-01	Penal Code 1871 enacted
2010-01-01	Criminal Procedure Code 2010 enacted
2023-02-01	Appellant last reoffended
2024-04-11	Reformative Training Report dated
2024-05-24	Probation Suitability Report dated
2024-10-04	Email exchange between Appellant’s counsel and school lecturer
2024-10-06	Letter by Appellant’s former secondary school principal dated
2024-10-07	Email exchange between Appellant’s counsel and school lecturer
2024-10-08	Appellant made full restitution for theft-in-dwelling offence
2024-10-09	Personal letter by the Appellant
2024-10-10	Appellant’s Supporting Affidavit in CM 60 dated
2024-10-11	Appellant’s Written Submissions dated
2024-10-22	Judgment delivered

7. Legal Issues

Admissibility of Fresh Evidence in Criminal Appeal
- Outcome: The court disallowed the application to admit further evidence, finding that the evidence did not satisfy the condition of relevance.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Relevance of evidence
  - Reliability of evidence
  - Non-availability of evidence
- Related Cases:
  - [1954] 1 WLR 1489
  - [2017] 1 SLR 505
  - [2014] 3 SLR 299
  - [2018] 1 SLR 544
Manifest Excessiveness of Sentence
- Outcome: The court found that the sentence of reformative training was not manifestly excessive, given the seriousness of the offences and the need for deterrence and retribution.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Appropriateness of reformative training
  - Consideration of rehabilitation, deterrence, and retribution
  - Weight given to youth of offender
- Related Cases:
  - [2008] 1 SLR(R) 449
  - [2016] 1 SLR 334
  - [2019] 1 SLR 941
  - [2019] 5 SLR 654
  - [2018] 5 SLR 1289
  - [2016] 5 SLR 166
  - [2018] 3 SLR 1300

8. Remedies Sought

Substitution of reformative training with probation

9. Cause of Actions

Rioting
Sexual Penetration of a Minor
Theft-in-Dwelling

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Appeals
Sentencing Guidelines

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Ladd v Marshall	English Court of Appeal	Yes	[1954] 1 WLR 1489	England and Wales	Cited for the three conditions for admitting fresh evidence in a criminal appeal: non-availability, relevance, and reliability.
Iskandar bin Rahmat v Public Prosecutor and other matters	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2017] 1 SLR 505	Singapore	Cited for the qualification that the condition of non-availability is less paramount than the other two conditions when admitting fresh evidence.
Soh Meiyun v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2014] 3 SLR 299	Singapore	Cited for the qualification that the condition of non-availability is less paramount than the other two conditions when admitting fresh evidence and for the relevance condition.
Public Prosecutor v Mohd Ariffan bin Mohd Hassan	High Court	Yes	[2018] 1 SLR 544	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the court may accord greater latitude to the applicant when the application is made following a plea of guilt and the only issue before the court is that of sentencing.
Gan Chai Bee Anne v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2019] 4 SLR 838	Singapore	Cited for the principle that limited mitigating weight should be placed on belated restitution.
Public Prosecutor v Mohammad Al-Ansari bin Basri	High Court	Yes	[2008] 1 SLR(R) 449	Singapore	Cited for the two-stage sentencing framework applicable to youthful offenders and the deterrent effect of probation.
Public Prosecutor v Koh Wen Jie Boaz	High Court	Yes	[2016] 1 SLR 334	Singapore	Cited for the two-stage sentencing framework applicable to youthful offenders and that reformative training will generally be the appropriate sentence where a degree of deterrence is also required.
Public Prosecutor v ASR	High Court	Yes	[2019] 1 SLR 941	Singapore	Cited for the relevant factors to consider when identifying the primary sentencing considerations.
Public Prosecutor v Tan Seo Whatt Albert and another appeal	High Court	Yes	[2019] 5 SLR 654	Singapore	Cited for the principle that ignorance of the law is no excuse, whether to exculpate from criminal liability or to mitigate in sentencing.
A Karthik v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2018] 5 SLR 1289	Singapore	Cited for the proposition that the actions of a young offender may be more readily excused on the grounds of his youthful folly and inexperience, but distinguished.
Public Prosecutor v Ong Jack Hong	High Court	Yes	[2016] 5 SLR 166	Singapore	Cited for the principle that reformative training will generally be the appropriate sentence where, although rehabilitation remains the dominant sentencing consideration, a degree of deterrence is also required.
Praveen s/o Krishnan v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2018] 3 SLR 1300	Singapore	Cited for the observation that probation with the additional condition of hostel residence of a specified duration strikes a good balance between rehabilitation and deterrence.
Public Prosecutor v JCY	District Court	Yes	[2024] SGDC 183	Singapore	The District Court decision being appealed.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Penal Code 1871 s 147	Singapore
Penal Code s 376A(1)(a)	Singapore
Penal Code s 376A(3)	Singapore
Penal Code s 380	Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code 2010 s 392(1)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Reformative training
Probation
Manifestly excessive
Deterrence
Retribution
Rehabilitation
Youthful offender
Fresh evidence
Sentencing considerations
Singapore Boys’ Hostel

15.2 Keywords

Criminal Law
Sentencing
Reformative Training
Probation
Youthful Offenders
Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Sentencing	95
Criminal Law	90
Criminal Procedure	85
Sex Offences	80
Rioting	75
Youthful Offenders	70
Theft	60
Family Law	50

16. Subjects

Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Sentencing