11 Nov 2010
The Magistrate did not err: the 21 month starting point was appropriate, a one month deduction for administrative custody was correctly applied, and absence of strong humanitarian grounds meant no further reduction was warranted; therefore the appeal is dismissed and the sentence confirmed.
4 Nov 2004
The judge's order backdating the commencement of the burglary sentence to 1 March 2004 was not authorised by law; section 68 permits directions about commencement relative to other sentences but does not permit the form of backdating used here, and section 67A(1) ensured the custody periods were already credited so no loss occurred; accordingly the backdating order was quashed and a lawful sentence of twenty months imprisonment was imposed.
30 Nov 1999
Leave out of time was refused because the reasons advanced for delay (father\'s longstanding illness and wife\'s ill-health) did not constitute proper grounds to justify late filing and because the application lacked merit; however the court ordered that one month of time spent in custody shall not count towards the sentence.
8 Oct 1999
Previous periods of detention resulted from the appellant's absences from court and the obtaining of a DATC report; they do not render the six month sentence manifestly excessive, and therefore the appeal is dismissed.
21 Jul 1994
The trial judge acted beyond legal authority in backdating the sentence; the Court of Appeal upheld that backdating was unauthorised but, to give effect to the judge's clear intention to grant credit for time spent in Chi Ma Wan, substituted a lawful shorter sentence (reducing the robbery count from four years to three years and two months) and allowed the Attorney General's review in part.