12 Aug 1986
The Court held that sentencing tariffs in Chan Chi Ming properly apply to the saleable mixture; the trial judge permissibly applied those guidelines to the 91.27g mixture, rejected the applicant's defence and there was no evidential basis to allow addict/small‑scale mitigation or to disturb the four year sentence; leave to appeal was dismissed.
1 May 1986
The Court held the trial judge did not err in refusing an adjournment because the appellant had ample time to secure legal representation or apply for legal aid and gave no adequate explanation for failing to do so; the s.46 presumption had been properly explained and the appellant elected to remain silent, and no procedural unfairness occurred that would justify quashing the conviction.
20 Jul 1976
Conviction was upheld under the presumption in s.46, but the sentence of 3 years' imprisonment was excessive because a material mitigating fact — the appellant's involuntary enforced overnight stay in Hong Kong while in transit without intent to import or dispose of the drug locally — was not placed before or apparently considered by the trial judge; accordingly the sentence was reduced to 2 years' imprisonment.
17 Nov 1972
The magistrate's finding that both men were in possession of the drugs was supported by the evidence (identical notebook entries, expert opinion, drugs found nearby and admission by the co-defendant); the statutory presumption under s.46 applied and was not rebutted, therefore the conviction was justified and the appeal is dismissed.
18 Aug 1971
Because the Government Chemist's certificate established that the unlawful drug salts were contained only as part of a 13 gramme admixture and the s.46 presumption does not apply to such admixtures, the magistrate must not have been entitled to convict for trafficking on that presumption; accordingly the trafficking conviction was set aside, a conviction for simple possession substituted and the sentence reduced to nine months' imprisonment.