HKSAR v. WONG YIK HO
- Citation
- HKSAR v. WONG YIK HO
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Decision
- 14 August 2003
- Posture
- Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Appeal Judgment (court of First Instance, Appellate Jurisdiction)
- Case number
- HCMA414/2003
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Decision
- 14 August 2003
- Posture
- Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Appeal Judgment (court of First Instance, Appellate Jurisdiction)
- Case number
- HCMA414/2003
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The magistrate accepted the prosecution witnesses and medical evidence and rejected the defence; the appellant failed to demonstrate any error in the magistrate's factual or credibility findings, and therefore the conviction and the consequent finding of breach of probation were upheld.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction and probation breach finding upheld.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm on 17 January 2003 affirmed.
- Finding of breach of the probation order upheld.
02
Material facts
Parties
HKSAR
Respondent Counsel: Ms Sally Yam, Government Counsel, Department of JusticeWONG YIK HO
Appellant03
Procedural history
Posture
Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Appeal Judgment (court of First Instance, Appellate Jurisdiction)
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether there was sufficient evidence to support conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm
- 02
Whether the appellant breached the probation order dependent on that conviction
- 03
Whether the magistrate erred in assessing credibility and identification evidence
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellant submitted there was insufficient evidence to convict and denied breaching the probation order.
- Respondent
- Prosecution relied on identification by the complainant and witness evidence supported by a medical report; the magistrate accepted that evidence and rejected the defence accounts.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Common law / Criminal law principles
Prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- 02
Common law / Appellate jurisprudence
Appellate courts will not disturb a trial judge's findings of fact or credibility unless there is demonstrable error.
- 03
Probation practice and statutory framework; Offences Against the Person Ordinance Cap.212
A finding of breach of a probation order based on a subsequent conviction is dependent on the validity of that conviction.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The magistrate accepted the prosecution witnesses and medical evidence and rejected the defence; the appellant failed to demonstrate any error in the magistrate's factual or credibility findings, and therefore the conviction and the consequent finding of breach of probation were upheld.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction and probation breach finding upheld.
- Appeal dismissed.
- Conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm on 17 January 2003 affirmed.
- Finding of breach of the probation order upheld.
Source and reliance status
Court of First Instance · 14 August 2003
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· 14 August 2003
bjbj HCMA414/2003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Appellate Jurisdiction) MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 414 OF 2003 (ON APPEAL FROM STCC 700179 AND 700077 OF 2002) ---------------------------
BETWEEN HKSAR Respondent and WONG YIK HO Appellant --------------- Before : Hon Jackson J in Court Date of Hearing : 14 August 2003 Date of Judgment : 14 August 2003 -----------------------
J U D G M E N T ----------------------- Introduction
AUTONUMOUT On 17 January 2003 the appellant was convicted after trial at Fanling Magistrates Court of an offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to section 39 of the Offences Against the Person Ordinance, Cap.212. By reason of that conviction he was found to be in breach of a probation order imposed upon him in May 2002 for an offence of common assault contrary to section 40 of the same ordinance.
AUTONUMOUT On 11 February 2003 the appellant was sent to a detention center in respect of both matters and the probation order was discharged.
AUTONUMOUT The appellant appeals against his conviction on 17 January saying that there was no sufficient evidence , and against the finding that he was in breach of the probation order saying that I did not breach [it] . That breach was of course dependent upon the conviction appealed against. The trial
AUTONUMOUT The prosecution s case was that on 7 August 2002 a fight took place between two groups of boys at a basketball court in Chevalier Gardens, Ma On Shan in the New Territories. The appellant and another boy called Lai attacked a boy called Leung. The appellant punched Leung s head and Lai also struck him. Leung was able to identify the appellant as he had played basketball with him three to five times previously. The prosecution adduced as an exhibit a medical report on the injuries sustained by Leung. It indicated a bruise; swelling and tenderness at the left side of the head and the neck. Leung gave evidence of the assault as did a friend of his, called Chan, who said that he did not see the initial phase of the assault but that he saw Leung forced to the wall and beaten by the appellant and Lai.
AUTONUMOUT The appellant gave evidence as did Lai. They said that there had been a dispute on the basketball court between Lai and Leung which resulted in a fight in which the appellant took no part, albeit that initially he had tried to prevent the fight.
AUTONUMOUT In her Statement of Findings the magistrate says that she accepted the evidence of Leung and Chan but rejected that of the appellant and Lai, and she gave detailed reasons for so doing. The appeal
AUTONUMOUT Before me the appellant has been unable to point to anything which might suggest that the magistrate fell into error.
AUTONUMOUT Accordingly this appeal is dismissed. (C.G. Jackson) Judge of the Court of First Instance High Court Ms Sally Yam, GC of Department of Justice, for the Respondent Appellant in person
PAGE - 1udk 1udk &`#$ !cHN !cHN & 6"
CACV Jeannie MY MokSo ABC.dot setup Microsoft Word 9.0 Judiciary
CACV 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.