2 Jun 2022
The magistrate did not err: she properly applied Mok Cho Tik and sentencing principles, took appropriate starting points for small quantities, allowed guilty plea reductions, correctly treated re-offending on bail as an aggravating factor and was justified in ordering part-consecutive sentences; the total 4 months' imprisonment is neither excessive nor wrong in principle.
9 Feb 2000
The Court held the sentence of 3 years 8 months was appropriate and not excessive given the facts (151 packets containing 20.12 grams of heroin hydrochloride); the appeal was dismissed and the Court ordered that 2 months of time spent in custody shall not count towards the time to be served.
10 Feb 1998
The magistrate correctly assessed the offence and the offender's antecedents, appropriately selected a 12-month starting point for the theft and permissibly reduced it to 9 months for plea and mitigation; there was no error of principle and the appeal was therefore dismissed.
31 May 1996
The Court held that the 3-year sentence for the attempted lift robbery, given the facts and the partial discount for a guilty plea, was not excessive or wrong in principle and therefore the application for leave to appeal against sentence was dismissed.