HKSAR v DWI SAFITRI AND ANOTHER

HKSAR v DWI SAFITRI AND ANOTHER

The magistrate applied the correct sentencing principles from Usman Butt, set a 15‑month starting point, deducted administrative detention to reach 13 months, and correctly activated the existing 4‑week suspended sentences to run consecutively; therefore the appeals against sentence fail.

Citation
HKSAR v DWI SAFITRI AND ANOTHER
Parties
Respondent: HKSAR; 1st Appellant: DWI SAFITRI; 2nd Appellant: RUSI WINANTI
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
28 June 2012
Case Number
HCMA210/2012
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal to High Court (court of First Instance) / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Establishing or Joining a Business While a Removal Order Is in Force, Overstaying, Removal Order, Activation of Suspended Sentence, Sentencing Starting Points
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Immigration Law Sentencing Establishing or Joining a Business While a Removal Order Is in Force Overstaying Removal Order Activation of Suspended Sentence Sentencing Starting Points

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HKSAR

Respondent

DWI SAFITRI

1st Appellant

RUSI WINANTI

2nd Appellant

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal to High Court (court of First Instance) / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate starting point for sentence for the offence
  2. 2 Whether administrative detention should be deducted from sentence
  3. 3 Whether suspended sentences should be activated and ordered to run consecutively

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate applied the correct sentencing principles from Usman Butt, set a 15‑month starting point, deducted administrative detention to reach 13 months, and correctly activated the existing 4‑week suspended sentences to run consecutively; therefore the appeals against sentence fail.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Each appellant sentenced to 13 months imprisonment for the offence of establishing/joining a business while a removal order was in force
  • The previously suspended sentence of 4 weeks imprisonment for each appellant is activated and ordered to run consecutively, resulting in each appellant serving a total of 13 months and 4 weeks imprisonment