R. v. SO WING-SAN
The magistrate's assessment of the witnesses and approach to the evidence was proper and free of error; therefore there is no basis for interference and the appeal must be dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- R. v. SO WING-SAN
- Parties
- Respondent (crown): THE QUEEN; Appellant: SO WING-SAN
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Judgment Date
- 27 December 1996
- Case Number
- HCMA1144/1996
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Hearing on Appeal Against Conviction
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
- Legal Topics
- Careless Driving, Standard of Review on Appeal, Witness Credibility Assessment, Sentence Not Appealed
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
THE QUEEN
Respondent (crown)
SO WING-SAN
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Hearing on Appeal Against Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the magistrate erred in evaluating witness evidence and credibility
- 2 Whether the conviction for careless driving was unsafe or unreasonable
- 3 Whether the appellate court should re‑try facts or defer to magistrate's findings
Ratio Decidendi
The magistrate's assessment of the witnesses and approach to the evidence was proper and free of error; therefore there is no basis for interference and the appeal must be dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Conviction and fine of $1,500 affirmed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
bjbj& IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (Appellate Jurisdiction) Magistracy CRIMINAL Appeal No. 1144 of 1996 -------------------------------- BETWEEN THE QUEEN and SO WING-SAN ------------------------------- Coram: Stuart-Moore, J. in Court Date of Hearing : 27th December 1996 Date of Judgment: 27th December 1996 ---------------------- J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The Appellant was convicted, on 2nd September 1996, of careless driving by Mr. Patrick Li sitting at the Fanling Magistracy. He was fined $1,500 and he now appeals against his conviction only. The Appellant is a bus driver and was allegedly seen by a police officer on a motorcycle cutting into the path of a taxi that had to slow down very suddenly as a result of the bus making this manoeuvre. The Appellant denied this and said that he had stopped before moving forwards at the slip road. The learned Magistrate heard and saw the witnesses as the evidence unfolded in his court. I do not have that advantage but I have read what the witnesses had said to the Magistrate. I am not here to re-try the case. I can only interfere if the Magistrate fell into error in the way that he approached the evidence. His approach to the evidence was impeccable and there are no grounds on which I could possibly allow this appeal. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed. (M. Stuart Moore) Judge of the High Court Mr. Y.M. Liu, S.C.C. for Crown. Appellant in person. PAGE PAGE - - &`#$ W[SO @& @& \0W@W " & 6" IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG Registrar, Supreme Court Normal Microsoft Word 8.0 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG Title _PID_GUID :p:n Microsoft Word MSWordDoc Word.Document.8