26 May 1976
The court concluded that the first appellant's four year sentence was excessive given his minimal antecedents and genuine remorse and reduced it to three years; the second appellant's four year sentence was upheld because of his prior convictions and the seriousness of the offence.
24 Sept 1970
Because the appellants, though juveniles, participated in an armed nighttime robbery in which the victim was blindfolded, bound and suffered lacerations, the magistrate did not abuse his sentencing discretion in imposing corporal punishment; the court will not interfere except to reduce the number of strokes from nine to six for each appellant.
12 Sept 1970
Appeals dismissed because the trial judge correctly ruled after voir dires that the contested statements were made voluntarily and admissibly, the Crown led ample circumstantial and corroborative evidence (including recovered jewellery, pawned watches, money and admissions) to support convictions on identity, and references to voir dire rulings in the reasons for verdict did not amount to improper reliance; convictions and sentences were therefore affirmed.
18 Aug 1970
Although there were irregularities in the identification parade and it would have been preferable that the female victim gave evidence, the totality of the evidence—immediate report of the incident, accurate noting of the car registration, sighting and pursuit of that car within ten minutes, the appellant fleeing from the vehicle and being arrested nearby, and identification by an eye‑witness who observed the assault at close quarters—was sufficient to support the conviction; the appeal and the out‑of‑time application against sentence are dismissed.
13 Jul 1970
Given the appellant's active use of a knife to terrorize a victim, his previous convictions and poor response to rehabilitation, and the significant rise in robberies involving youths, the court held that corporal punishment in addition to a short term of imprisonment was justified and proportionate; accordingly the appeal was dismissed.
18 May 1970
Although the learned judge erred in admitting evidence repeating excluded recorded statements, the defence elicited admissible evidence showing the appellant was in recent possession of two stolen watches without satisfactory explanation; under the doctrine of recent possession this supported the inference of theft and justified upholding the conviction for robbery with aggravation, and the appeal is dismissed.
18 Apr 1970
Convictions upheld; appellate court quashed the order for corporal punishment and ordered that time spent in prison pending the appeal be credited towards the sentence, with further consideration informed by probation, medical and s.4 DATC reports.
12 Feb 1970
Because the appellant was 16, had pleaded guilty and cooperated with police, and the Superintendent of Training Centres agreed to accept him, the appellate court found detention in a training centre under s.4 of the Training Centres Ordinance to be more appropriate than the cumulative 16 months' imprisonment and therefore set aside the prison sentence and ordered detention in a training centre for up to three years.
22 Jan 1970
Having regard to the appellant's lack of previous convictions, past mental disturbance (though not requiring treatment), genuine remorse, family responsibilities, steady employment, favourable probation report and time in custody, the court concluded that probation for two years with a recorded conviction was more likely to achieve reformation than continued imprisonment and substituted that order for the original 12‑month sentence.
13 Nov 1969
Because the appellant was 18 and the learned Magistrate's record did not show compliance with the mandatory requirements of section 109A Cap.221, the appellate court obtained and considered reports and concluded a Training Centre disposal under the Training Centres Ordinance Cap.280 was the correct method; the 18‑month prison sentence was therefore quashed and substituted with detention in a Training Centre.