HKSAR v. AU PAK CHUNG

HKSAR v. AU PAK CHUNG

The conviction was upheld because the combined testimony of the victim and a second witness together with the CCTV footage provided sufficient evidence that the appellant's presence and conduct caused reasonable concern; the sentence was reduced because six months imprisonment was excessive for the offence as committed although a custodial, deterrent sentence was justified given prior sexual offending and the psychologist's assessment of high risk of reoffending; the appropriate sentence was held to be about two months and the appellant was to be released forthwith.

Citation
HKSAR v. AU PAK CHUNG
Parties
Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: Respondent
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
9 October 2009
Case Number
HCMA586/2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence in the Court of First Instance
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part with sentence reduced and immediate release ordered.
Legal Topics
Loitering Causing Concern, Indecent Conduct, Appeal Against Conviction, Appeal Against Sentence, Risk of Reoffending, Probation/psychological Reports
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Sentencing Loitering Causing Concern Indecent Conduct Appeal Against Conviction Appeal Against Sentence Risk of Reoffending Probation/psychological Reports

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence in the Court of First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for loitering causing concern was safe on the evidence (witness testimony and CCTV)
  2. 2 Whether the six month custodial sentence was manifestly excessive and appropriate given prior convictions and psychological risk assessment
  3. 3 Admissibility and relevance of collateral evidence (PW2) and weight of CCTV footage

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was upheld because the combined testimony of the victim and a second witness together with the CCTV footage provided sufficient evidence that the appellant's presence and conduct caused reasonable concern; the sentence was reduced because six months imprisonment was excessive for the offence as committed although a custodial, deterrent sentence was justified given prior sexual offending and the psychologist's assessment of high risk of reoffending; the appropriate sentence was held to be about two months and the appellant was to be released forthwith.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part with sentence reduced and immediate release ordered.

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction dismissed.
  • Appeal against sentence allowed to the extent of immediate release; sentence reduced to approximately 2 months imprisonment.