THE QUEEN v. TANG YUK KAN

THE QUEEN v. TANG YUK KAN

The trial judge properly excluded reliance on the identification evidence but validly admitted and relied upon the cautioned statement as a voluntary frank admission sufficient to establish guilt; there was no basis for appellate interference and leave to appeal against conviction is refused.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. TANG YUK KAN
Parties
Applicant/accused: Tang Yuk Kan; Respondent/prosecution: The Queen
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
18 March 1987
Case Number
CACC541/1986
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (robbery) / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused; conviction upheld.
Legal Topics
Robbery, Identification Evidence, Cautioned Statement (confession), Admissibility, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Evidence Appeal Robbery Identification Evidence Cautioned Statement (confession) Admissibility Credibility Assessment

Source-derived case record

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

Tang Yuk Kan

Applicant/accused

The Queen

Respondent/prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (robbery) / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether identification evidence was reliable sufficient for conviction
  2. 2 Whether the cautioned statement was admissible and sufficient to prove guilt
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in convicting despite doubts about identification evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge properly excluded reliance on the identification evidence but validly admitted and relied upon the cautioned statement as a voluntary frank admission sufficient to establish guilt; there was no basis for appellate interference and leave to appeal against conviction is refused.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused; conviction upheld.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal against conviction refused.
  • Conviction for robbery affirmed.