THE QUEEN v. AU WAI KEUNG AND OTHERS

THE QUEEN v. AU WAI KEUNG AND OTHERS

The appellate court held the magistrate was entitled to accept the second prosecution witness's evidence that the appellants joined a group assault and therefore the convictions were safe; given the first appellant's multiple prior convictions and repeated offending, a custodial sentence to a detention centre was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. AU WAI KEUNG AND OTHERS
Parties
Respondent: THE QUEEN; 1st Appellant: AU Wai-keung; 2nd Appellant: LUI Ka-ho; 3rd Appellant: LEE Sung-yue
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
2 July 1984
Case Number
HCMA374/1984
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence; Judgment Delivered on Appeal
Outcome
Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Common Assault, Conviction Appeal, Sentence Discretion, Probation, Detention Centre, Reformatory
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Juvenile Justice Sentencing Common Assault Conviction Appeal Sentence Discretion Probation Detention Centre +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE QUEEN

Respondent

AU Wai-keung

1st Appellant

LUI Ka-ho

2nd Appellant

LEE Sung-yue

3rd Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence; Judgment Delivered on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction was supported by the evidence and properly open to the magistrate
  2. 2 Whether a custodial sentence was appropriate for a young offender with prior convictions
  3. 3 Appropriate sentencing disposition for juvenile offenders including detention centre versus reformatory or probation

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court held the magistrate was entitled to accept the second prosecution witness's evidence that the appellants joined a group assault and therefore the convictions were safe; given the first appellant's multiple prior convictions and repeated offending, a custodial sentence to a detention centre was justified while the other two appellants' committals to Castle Peak Reformatory were appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals against conviction dismissed
  • Appeals against sentence dismissed