R. v. CHENG CHI TO and Others

R. v. CHENG CHI TO and Others

Because defence counsel admitted (and the transcript showed) he did not follow the appellants' clear instructions to contest admissions and cautions, the convictions represented a miscarriage of justice and must be quashed; in the exercise of discretion, no retrial was ordered given the offence and public interest.

Citation
R. v. CHENG CHI TO and Others
Parties
1st Appellant: CHENG CHI-TO; 2nd Appellant: WONG KIN-WAH; 3rd Appellant: WONG KIN-WING; Respondent: THE QUEEN
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
7 November 1996
Case Number
HCMA1024/1996
Procedural Posture
Magistracy Appeal Criminal Conviction / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; fines and costs remitted; no retrial ordered.
Legal Topics
Going Equipped for Stealing, Admissibility of Verbal Admissions, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, Miscarriage of Justice, Retrial Discretion
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Legal Ethics Evidence Going Equipped for Stealing Admissibility of Verbal Admissions Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Miscarriage of Justice +1 more

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHENG CHI-TO

1st Appellant

WONG KIN-WAH

2nd Appellant

WONG KIN-WING

3rd Appellant

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Magistracy Appeal Criminal Conviction / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defence counsel failed to follow appellants' instructions to contest admissibility and to deny admissions and cautions
  2. 2 Whether that failure amounted to a miscarriage of justice warranting quashing convictions
  3. 3 Whether a retrial should be ordered despite quashing convictions

Ratio Decidendi

Because defence counsel admitted (and the transcript showed) he did not follow the appellants' clear instructions to contest admissions and cautions, the convictions represented a miscarriage of justice and must be quashed; in the exercise of discretion, no retrial was ordered given the offence and public interest.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; fines and costs remitted; no retrial ordered.

Orders

  • Conviction in respect of each appellant quashed.
  • Fines and costs remitted.