香港特別行政區 訴 陳就
The judge correctly directed the jury; the jury were entitled to reject the defendant's account and accept the prosecution evidence including the confessions; the evidence established trafficking in the specified quantities beyond reasonable doubt, therefore the application for leave to appeal against conviction was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] HKCA 747
- Parties
- Respondent: Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; Applicant: Chan Chau (陳就)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 3 July 2019
- Case Number
- CACC308/2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Conviction — Leave to Appeal Application / Determination of Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused.
- Legal Topics
- Drug Possession and Trafficking, Confession Evidence, Search and Seizure, Credibility of Witnesses, Jury Directions
- Source Language
- ch
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
Respondent
Chan Chau (陳就)
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Conviction — Leave to Appeal Application / Determination of Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the drugs were lawfully seized and whether evidence was planted by police
- 2 Admissibility and weight of oral and recorded confessions
- 3 Whether the jury were properly directed on credibility and other issues
Ratio Decidendi
The judge correctly directed the jury; the jury were entitled to reject the defendant's account and accept the prosecution evidence including the confessions; the evidence established trafficking in the specified quantities beyond reasonable doubt, therefore the application for leave to appeal against conviction was refused.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused.
Orders
- Leave to appeal against conviction refused.
- Conviction upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
CACC 308/2017 [2019] HKCA 747 香港特別行政區 高等法院上訴法庭 刑事司法管轄權 定罪上訴許可申請 刑事上訴案件2017年第308號 （原高等法院原訟法庭刑事案件2015年第443號） 答辯人 香港特別行政區 對 申請人 陳就（CHAN CHAU） 主審法官： 高等法院署理首席法官楊振權 聆訊日期： 2019年6月27日 判案日期： 2019年6月27日 頒發判案理由書日期： 2019年7月3日 判案理由書 根據控方的證據，申請人（陳就）被截查時，警員在其攜帶的斜孭袋內搜出兩袋海洛英，一袋重37.2克，另一袋重4.31克，另加8個錫紙包內載有62片含0.8克咪達唑侖（“藍精靈”）片劑及1.57克“冰毒”。該些毒品的總巿值為49,405港元。 除了截查和搜獲毒品的證據外，控方亦指申請人在警誡下有作出口頭招認，而和警員進行錄影會面時他亦對罪行作出全面招認。 申請人承認管有4.31克海洛英，但指其餘毒品是遭警員插贓嫁禍。他指自己沒有作出過口頭招認，而在進行錄影會面時更是按警員的指示而作出招認。 陪審團裁定申請人罪名成立是建基在他們作出的事實裁決。申請人多次強調警員在其身上搜獲的現金是多少一事有向陪審團全面披露，而他們亦必然會將該事件考慮在內，以決定涉案警員的誠信。 本席已有小心考慮原審法官給予陪審團的指引。本席認為該指引是全面、正確及公平的，並不具申請人所指的不公平及有偏見。 陪審團有權否定申請人的證供及接納控方的說法，並裁定申請人確有販運第一項控罪所指的37.2克海洛英，即共41.51克海洛英。 申請人提出的上訴理由，沒有可爭拗的地方。因此，本席不批准申請人就第一項控罪的定罪提出的上訴許可申請。 （楊振權） 高等法院署理首席法官 答辯人： 由律政司助理刑事檢控專員雷芷茗代表。 申請人： 沒有律師代表，親自應訊。