THE QUEEN v. WOO TAT MING

THE QUEEN v. WOO TAT MING

The magistrate's detailed credibility findings were justified on the evidence; the challenged statements were admissible; the evidence supported convictions for possession of an offensive weapon, resisting arrest and theft; the sentences, including the statutory minimum for the weapon offence and additional concurrent three-month terms for theft ordered consecutive to the six-month term, were appropriate given the appellant's age and 22 prior convictions; therefore the appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. WOO TAT MING
Parties
Prosecution: THE QUEEN; Defendant/appellant: WOO Tat-ming
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 November 1986
Case Number
HCMA1047/1986
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as to conviction and sentence
Legal Topics
Possession of Offensive Weapon, Resisting Arrest, Theft, Admissibility of Confessions, Credibility of Witnesses, Sentencing
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Procedure/appeals Evidence Possession of Offensive Weapon Resisting Arrest Theft Admissibility of Confessions Credibility of Witnesses +1 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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE QUEEN

Prosecution

WOO Tat-ming

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statements obtained from the appellant were voluntary and admissible
  2. 2 Whether the magistrate erred in his credibility findings
  3. 3 Whether the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for possession of an offensive weapon, resisting arrest and theft

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate's detailed credibility findings were justified on the evidence; the challenged statements were admissible; the evidence supported convictions for possession of an offensive weapon, resisting arrest and theft; the sentences, including the statutory minimum for the weapon offence and additional concurrent three-month terms for theft ordered consecutive to the six-month term, were appropriate given the appellant's age and 22 prior convictions; therefore the appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as to conviction and sentence

Orders

  • Convictions affirmed
  • Sentences affirmed: six months' imprisonment (for possession of an offensive weapon and resisting arrest, concurrent) and three months' imprisonment on each of two theft charges (concurrent with each other but consecutive to the six months), total effective sentence nine months' imprisonment