Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Pre-sentence reports

Legal area

Court

29 Jun 2018

HKSAR v. CHUI CHUNG-HIN

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 1504
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA95/2018

The appeal court held that the magistrate had lawfully exercised his discretion, had considered the totality principle and relevant mitigation including psychiatric evidence, but on the evidence it was appropriate to reduce the aggregate custodial sentence from 12 months to 9 months to reflect unusual mitigating circumstances and promote rehabilitation; thus appeal allowed in part.
26 Aug 2004

HKSAR v. CHAN WAI KWOK

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN WAI KWOK
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA569/2004

The Court held the 14‑day immediate custodial sentence was appropriate and not excessive because the assault on an on‑duty Customs Officer was an aggravating factor warranting a deterrent custodial sentence and the magistrate did not err in declining to obtain reports.
1 Mar 2001

HKSAR v. CHENG KA WING

Citation

HKSAR v. CHENG KA WING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC452/2000

The judge did not err: the additional probation report did not compel a probation order, the pre-existing reports sufficiently informed sentencing despite the altered factual basis, and the sentence of Detention Centre training was within proper sentencing discretion for a young offender and not unjustifiably disparate; application dismissed.
11 Jul 2000

HKSAR v. LEONARD LEUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. LEONARD LEUNG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC64/2000

The Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal; the sentence imposed by the District Court (32 months imprisonment, with activation of a suspended sentence to yield a total of 41 months) was not excessive given the applicant's extensive record, the value of the offences and breaches of prior suspensions; fabrication of documents undermined mitigation and, as a punitive measure for a wholly unmeritorious application, four months of custody time awaiting the hearing shall not count towards the applicant's sentence.
26 Jun 1997

R v. CHAN CHUN FAI

Citation

R v. CHAN CHUN FAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC87/1997

The Court affirmed the sentencing judge's exercise of discretion: the judge considered the reports, applied an appropriate discount for plea and cooperation, reasonably declined a Drug Addiction Treatment Centre order given the Applicant's history and reports, and no material was presented to justify reducing the two-year sentence.
5 Sept 1991

THE QUEEN v. NGUYEN VAN-HUY

Citation

THE QUEEN v. NGUYEN VAN-HUY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA187/1991

Court held that (1) the police had reasonable grounds to search the appellant; (2) the appellant's recent possession of stolen goods found shortly after the theft permitted the magistrate to infer his participation in the burglary and sustain the convictions; (3) however the magistrate erred in sentencing by failing to obtain reports for a 19-year-old where a non-custodial option might have been appropriate, requiring reduction of sentence and immediate release.
5 May 1969

CHAU KAM TIM v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHAU KAM TIM v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC215/1969

Despite the grave seriousness of the offences the appellate court allowed the appeal in part and substituted a three-year probation order with usual terms plus a residential condition because updated probation reports and the appellant's agreement indicated probation was appropriate.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. CHUI CHUNG-HIN

HKSAR v. CHAN WAI KWOK

HKSAR v. CHENG KA WING

HKSAR v. LEONARD LEUNG

R v. CHAN CHUN FAI

THE QUEEN v. NGUYEN VAN-HUY

CHAU KAM TIM v. THE QUEEN