Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Consecutive and concurrent sentences

Legal area

Court

3 Jan 2017

HKSAR v. WANG SHUAI ALSO KNOWN AS YEUNG FUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. WANG SHUAI ALSO KNOWN AS YEUNG FUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC183/2016

The sentencing judge correctly applied established sentencing principles and relevant authorities, adopted reasonable starting points, properly discounted the sentence for a guilty plea, and legitimately ordered limited consecutive terms consistent with the totality principle; the total effective sentence of 2 years 9 months imprisonment is not excessive and the application for leave to appeal is refused.
16 Jan 2014

HKSAR v. CHOI HANG KEI

Citation

HKSAR v. CHOI HANG KEI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC270/2013

The judge materially erred by using mixture weights rather than narcotic content; recalculation gives ketamine narcotic content 1,028.84g which supports a 14-year starting point (reduced to 13 years 6 months overall because some ketamine in Count 2 justified mitigation for self-consumption), applying one-third discount yields an overall sentence of 9 years. Appeal allowed; original sentences quashed and substituted accordingly.
3 Sept 2013

HKSAR v. LAM SEE CHUNG,STEPHEN

Citation

HKSAR v. LAM SEE CHUNG,STEPHEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC339/2012

The Court held the deputy judge’s enhancement to a 4‑year starting point for each credit‑card offence was disproportionate; the correct starting point was 3 years 6 months for each of charges 2–4, reduced by one‑third for guilty pleas to 28 months each; the concurrent/consecutive order was adjusted (16 months consecutive quashed; 7 months consecutive on charge 4 ordered) to give an overall total sentence reflecting the totality principle, resulting in an overall custodial term of 4 years 3 months for the applicant.
14 Jul 2009

HKSAR v. FAN KIT HUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. FAN KIT HUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC62/2009

The Court held the total sentence of 6 years was manifestly excessive because it reflected a notional starting point of 9 years; having considered the aggravating and mitigating factors the proper notional starting point was 6 years leading to a total sentence of 4 years; the Court allowed the appeal and adjusted concurrency/consecutivity (leave individual sentences intact) to achieve a 4 year aggregate sentence.
12 Mar 2009

HKSAR v. OZCETIN NURDAN

Citation

HKSAR v. OZCETIN NURDAN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA111/2009

The magistrate's starting point and ultimate sentence of 15 months for using a forged travel document, reduced from a 22‑month starting point because of a guilty plea, was within the established range for the offence and not manifestly excessive; the appeal against that sentence fails.
4 Sept 2007

HKSAR v. HO YUNG KEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. HO YUNG KEUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC35/2007

The Court allowed the appeal in part, holding that for the very small quantities involved a 2‑year starting point per charge (leading to an overall starting point of about 3 years 8 months) was appropriate; after applying a one‑third guilty plea discount the total sentence was reduced from 40 to 29 months, with each of the four charges recorded as 20 months and 3 months of each of the 2nd–4th charges ordered to run consecutively to the 1st, yielding a total of 29 months.
1 Dec 2005

HKSAR v. WAN HIN CHUNG, MIKE AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. WAN HIN CHUNG, MIKE AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC163/2004

The Court held the monetary transfer documents were admissible as part of the background/full picture capable of rebutting the defence that D7 was merely a salaried employee; the trial judge's directions were adequate and did not permit improper use of the evidence by the jury; D7's inconsistency argument failed because the evidence against him materially differed from that against other defendants; accordingly D7's application to appeal his conviction was dismissed. On sentence, although some individual sentences were imperfectly arrived at, totality was appropriate; the Court reallocated in…
4 Jan 2005

HKSAR v. YIP KWOK TO

Citation

HKSAR v. YIP KWOK TO
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC352/2004

The application was dismissed because the sentencing judge acted within proper sentencing principles: he used consistent starting points and plea reductions for offences common to both defendants, properly reduced the plea discount given the applicant had absconded, and took the totality principle into account so the aggregate sentence was not manifestly excessive.
25 Aug 2004

HKSAR v. LEE WAI KEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. LEE WAI KEUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC4/2004

Although the sentencing judge erred by not treating offences committed on bail as an aggravating factor and by ordering the sentences to run wholly concurrently with an earlier term, the Court found no sustainable ground to reduce the overall sentence; the appeal against sentence is without merit and is dismissed.
7 Jul 2004

HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN LAN

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN LAN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA512/2004

Individual sentences imposed by the magistrate were appropriate as starting points given quantity and role, but the aggregate term required adjustment under the totality principle to achieve a proportionate overall sentence; accordingly the court upheld individual terms but ordered partly concurrent execution to reduce the total to six months imprisonment.