THE QUEEN v. CHAN TUNG-YU AND ANOTHER

THE QUEEN v. CHAN TUNG-YU AND ANOTHER

The minor discrepancy in the witness's description did not undermine the magistrate's acceptance of corroborating police evidence that both appellants acted in concert in an attempted theft; accordingly the conviction stands and the magistrate's refusal to suspend the lawful six-month sentences was a proper exercise of sentencing discretion and will not be disturbed on appeal.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. CHAN TUNG-YU AND ANOTHER
Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; 1st Appellant: Chan Tung-yu; 2nd Appellant: Fung Tak-ming
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
10 April 1985
Case Number
HCMA227/1985
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (leave Granted on Sentence)
Outcome
Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Attempted Theft, Joint Liability, Witness Credibility, Suspension of Sentence, Magistrates' Discretion, Pick Pocketing
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Evidence Sentencing Appeal Attempted Theft Joint Liability Witness Credibility Suspension of Sentence +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

Chan Tung-yu

1st Appellant

Fung Tak-ming

2nd Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (leave Granted on Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a discrepancy in a witness's description undermined the conviction
  2. 2 Whether the magistrate erred in refusing to suspend the sentences

Ratio Decidendi

The minor discrepancy in the witness's description did not undermine the magistrate's acceptance of corroborating police evidence that both appellants acted in concert in an attempted theft; accordingly the conviction stands and the magistrate's refusal to suspend the lawful six-month sentences was a proper exercise of sentencing discretion and will not be disturbed on appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals against conviction dismissed
  • Leave to appeal against sentence granted