HKSAR v. CHEN RU CHU

HKSAR v. CHEN RU CHU

The appeal against sentence is dismissed; the sentencing judge properly found that possession of the forged identity card was to assist unlawful stay and that a 15 month term for that offence and a concurrent 28 day term for overstaying three months were within established precedents and not excessive.

Citation
HKSAR v. CHEN RU CHU
Parties
Respondent: HKSAR; Appellant: CHEN RU CHU
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
11 July 2003
Case Number
HCMA450/2003
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Appeal Against Sentence (on Appeal From WSCC 463 of 2003)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; sentences upheld.
Legal Topics
Forgery, Identity Card Offences, Overstaying, Sentencing
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Immigration Law Forgery Identity Card Offences Overstaying Sentencing

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Respondent

CHEN RU CHU

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Appeal Against Sentence (on Appeal From WSCC 463 of 2003)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 15 months sentence for possession of a forged identity card was excessive
  2. 2 Whether production of the forged identity card to police is an aggravating factor justifying a higher sentence
  3. 3 Whether the 28 day sentence for overstaying three months is excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against sentence is dismissed; the sentencing judge properly found that possession of the forged identity card was to assist unlawful stay and that a 15 month term for that offence and a concurrent 28 day term for overstaying three months were within established precedents and not excessive.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; sentences upheld.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Sentence of 15 months imprisonment on the first offence and 28 days imprisonment on the second offence to run concurrently is upheld.