26 Apr 2012
The appeal fails because the appellant did not arrive by the permit-specified vessel, landed deliberately at a beach and worked illegally away from the fish market, was not in possession of the permit when arrested and admitted illegal entry; these facts distinguish the case from 陳李普 and remove the basis for a reduced sentence, so the 15-month sentence is appropriate.
6 Jun 2008
Because the appellant conceded she knew there was a risk the vehicle was uninsured yet continued to drive, those circumstances did not amount to special reasons related to the commission of the offence; therefore the 12 month disqualification imposed by the magistrate was correctly imposed and the appeal was dismissed.
22 Mar 2007
There is no categorical bar to recognising pre-arrest assistance in mitigation of sentence; sentencing courts must evaluate the circumstances and may grant a reduction according to the assistance's nature, extent and reliability. On the facts the appellant's pre-arrest assistance warranted a reduction of sentence from five and a half years to five years.
26 Oct 2006
The Court of Final Appeal granted leave to appeal and certified as a point of great and general importance the question whether useful information provided before arrest must be taken into account in mitigation of sentence; the court did not decide the substantive issue on the merits.
9 May 2002
The magistrate correctly applied the law and considered mitigation; the appellant's circumstances were not sufficiently special to displace the mandatory 12 month disqualification and the two month custodial term suspended for 18 months was appropriate; therefore the appeal against sentence is dismissed.
26 May 2000
The Court held the sentence of 2 years' imprisonment was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive; the trial judge had properly weighed mitigation (guilty plea, clear record, provocation) but the brutal nature of the attack with a dangerous weapon and repeated hacking justified the sentence and precluded further reduction.
3 Sept 1997
Extension of time to apply for leave to appeal was refused because the original sentence of ten years' imprisonment, imposed after a one-third reduction from a 15-year starting point for around 400 grams, was proper and appropriate; the applicant offered no sufficient reason for the delay and personal circumstances did not justify interference with the sentence.
11 Aug 1995
Where disputed facts are closely bound up with the ingredients of the offence and with prosecutorial discretion under Attorney General guidelines, a Newton enquiry is proper; facts found on that enquiry are relevant to the degree of mitigation and an unsuccessful challenge may reduce the credit for remorse; accordingly the magistrate was justified in holding a Newton enquiry and in imposing a heavier-than-tariff sentence on the facts of this case.
16 Mar 1994
The application to treat the abandonment of the appeal against sentence as a nullity was refused because the payments were not made out of remorse, the circumstances did not meet the exceptional threshold required to reinstate an abandoned appeal, and any change to sentence can only be effected by the Executive via the prerogative of mercy.
26 Mar 1973
Convictions for both offences are upheld and fines are appropriate; however, because the appellant holds a licence to drive mini-buses and the insurance certificate was defective only as to carriage for hire or reward, the court will limit the 12 month disqualification to private motor-cars to avoid depriving the appellant of his livelihood.