HKSAR v. CHEN HONGLIANG
- Citation
- HKSAR v. CHEN HONGLIANG
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Decision
- 17 April 2007
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal (magistracy Appeal) / Appeal Against Sentence Judgment
- Case number
- HCMA248/2007
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Decision
- 17 April 2007
- Posture
- Criminal Appeal (magistracy Appeal) / Appeal Against Sentence Judgment
- Case number
- HCMA248/2007
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The appropriate sentence for remaining in Hong Kong after unlawful landing, on the facts and after plea, is 15 months under the tariff in So Man-king; the appellant's prior convictions and lack of exceptional humanitarian grounds justify upholding the 15-month sentence, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Sentence of 15 months imprisonment upheld
02
Material facts
Parties
HKSAR
Respondent Counsel: Ms. Winnie Lam, Government CounselCHEN HONGLIANG
AppellantAmounts and remedies
- Sentence (months): 15
- Previous Sentence (months): 12
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Appeal (magistracy Appeal) / Appeal Against Sentence Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the 15 months imprisonment sentence was appropriate under tariff guidelines
- 02
Whether there were exceptional humanitarian grounds warranting reduction of sentence
- 03
Whether the appellant's prior convictions and recidivism justified the sentence
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The appellant pleaded guilty and argued on humanitarian grounds for early release to return to his family; he relied on dire financial circumstances, the need to support wife, children and elderly parents, and his parents' ill health.
- Respondent
- The Crown relied on the appellant's previous convictions and recidivism and on the tariff guidelines in So Man-king [1989] 1 HKLR 142 to support a 15-month sentence and submitted there were no exceptional humanitarian circumstances to warrant reduction.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
So Man-king [1989] 1 HKLR 142
Tariff guideline for unlawful remaining after unlawful landing supports a sentence of about 15 months after plea
- 02
Judgment of Deputy Judge E Toh (this case) applying established sentencing principles
Humanitarian grounds can justify departure from tariff only if exceptional or special circumstances are shown
- 03
Judgment of Deputy Judge E Toh (this case)
Previous convictions and recidivism are aggravating factors in sentencing
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The appropriate sentence for remaining in Hong Kong after unlawful landing, on the facts and after plea, is 15 months under the tariff in So Man-king; the appellant's prior convictions and lack of exceptional humanitarian grounds justify upholding the 15-month sentence, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
Obiter and limits
- The appellant knowingly entered unlawfully despite knowledge of his family situation and inability to work legally in Hong Kong
- Keeping the father's cancer diagnosis from him and the appellant's motives to seek employment did not constitute exceptional circumstances to reduce sentence
- The appellant had previous similar offending including a 12-month sentence in 1991
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed
- Appeal dismissed
- Sentence of 15 months imprisonment upheld
Source and reliance status
Court of First Instance · 17 April 2007
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court of First Instance
Judgment· 17 April 2007
bjbj HCMA 248/2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. HCMA 248 OF 2007 (ON APPEAL FROM KCCC 1005/2007) ____
BETWEEN HKSAR Respondent and CHEN HONGLIANG Appellant ____ Before: Deputy High Court Judge E Toh in Court Date of Hearing: 17 April 2007 Date of Judgment: 17 April 2007 ___
J U D G M E N T ___ The Appellant had pleaded guilty to one charge of remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration after having landed unlawfully, contrary to section 38(1)(b) of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115 and he was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment. The Appellant now appeals against the sentence. The Appellant was found at 2135 hours by a police officer in Mongkok. He admitted that he had illegally entered Hong Kong with a view to looking for a job. The Appellant was represented by a duty lawyer who told the learned Magistrate that the Appellant had to support a family consisting of his wife, children and elderly parents; and that they were in dire financial straits. The learned Magistrate, after considering that the Appellant had previous convictions in Hong Kong and also the tariff guidelines set down in So Man King s case [1989] 1 HKLR 142, he sentenced the defendant to 15 months imprisonment. The Appellant today appealed on humanitarian grounds to be allowed to leave Hong Kong earlier so that he can return to his family because he says his parents are old. His father suffers from hypertension and also cancer; and he has kept the fact of the cancer from his father in order not to upset him. He claimed he came to Hong Kong to try to find a job to earn money. The Appellant is not a stranger to Hong Kong. He came here
previously three times and he had also committed a similar offence in 1991 when he received 12 months imprisonment. He knows that without coming lawfully and without permission to work he cannot work in Hong Kong. The Appellant knew about his family situation before he came to Hong Kong but yet he chose to take the risk. The tariff guidelines laid down in the case of So Man-king affirms that an appropriate sentence after plea is 15 months imprisonment for this type of offence. I agree with the learned Magistrate that there are no exceptional humanitarian grounds or special circumstances in this case to warrant a departure from that sentence. I see no merit at all in this appeal and so this appeal is dismissed. (E Toh) Deputy Judge of the Court of First Instance High Court Ms. Winnie Lam, Government Counsel, for the Respondent The Appellant, acting in person
PAGE -
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T U V 1udk 1udk qmd_dUd vanA vanA '@^0 '@^0 '@^0 '@^0 '@^0 '@^0 HCMA.dot setup Microsoft Word 9.0 Judiciary Hong Kong Title Microsoft Word Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.