Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Triad society membership

Legal area

Court

22 Jul 2016

HKSAR v. CHAN CHEUK HONG

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN CHEUK HONG
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC5/2016

The Court found no error in the individual starting points or final sentences for each charge but held it was reasonably arguable that the cumulative effect of consecutive sentences produced an excessive aggregate term; accordingly leave to appeal was granted to permit full appellate consideration of whether parts of the sentences (notably the consecutive portion of the second blackmail and the drug sentence) should have been ordered concurrent under the totality principle.
17 Oct 2008

HKSAR v. CHUNG HO YIN, GARY

Citation

HKSAR v. CHUNG HO YIN, GARY
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA470/2008

The magistrate was entitled to disbelieve the appellant based on implausibility and inconsistencies in his account; those credibility findings, together with the prosecution evidence, satisfied the burden of proof and the omission to call the driver did not undermine the prosecution case. The appeal is dismissed.
25 Nov 2005

HKSAR v. HO, TING CHAO

Citation

HKSAR v. HO, TING CHAO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA852/2005

The conviction was upheld because the magistrate accepted the uncontradicted evidence of the licensee and the appellant offered no evidence to contradict it; the sentence to a Training Centre was appropriate and inevitable given the appellant's antecedents and the report indicating triad association.
15 Mar 2005

HKSAR v. PUI KAM FAI AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. PUI KAM FAI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1079/2004

Convictions were upheld because the undercover officer made contemporaneous notes naming the suspects, the names matched the persons identified at parade, the magistrate considered the relevant identification factors (albeit not in verbatim Turnbull formula) and found no material inconsistency, and there was no unfairness from lack of representation where no timely steps for counsel had been taken.
16 Nov 2004

HKSAR v. CHAN WOON TING

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN WOON TING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA591/2004

The Magistrate made an unsupported factual finding on Charge 6 that bore directly on the Appellant's credibility; because the record does not show the Magistrate separated consideration of charges and there is a real doubt that the error affected findings on Charge 4, the convictions were unsafe and must be quashed; costs awarded to the Appellant.
18 Nov 2003

HKSAR v. LAI CHI MAN AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. LAI CHI MAN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA958/2003

The magistrate correctly directed himself on the law and, on the evidence before him — credible prosecution witnesses, expert opinion identifying initiation ritual, the collection of mobile phones, and the appellants' cautioned statements — was entitled to find the appellants had the requisite mens rea and membership/attendance; there was no proper basis to disturb the convictions.
4 Dec 2002

HKSAR v. YIP WING CHI LOUIS

Citation

HKSAR v. YIP WING CHI LOUIS
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1079/2002

The magistrate's credibility findings were supported by independent corroboration and were not impeached on appeal; the appellant's untested unsworn interview and peripheral maternal evidence did not outweigh the credible, consistent prosecution evidence, therefore the convictions must stand.
8 Aug 2002

HKSAR v. POON TIN YAN

Citation

HKSAR v. POON TIN YAN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA1321/2001

The magistrate properly assessed credibility, found the first prosecution witness reliable despite immaterial inconsistencies, and lawfully convicted the appellant for claiming membership of Wo Shing Wo; the appellate court will not disturb those findings and dismissed the appeal.
22 Jun 2001

HKSAR v. WONG MAN HO

Citation

HKSAR v. WONG MAN HO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA323/2001

The magistrate erred by relying on the prosecutor's opening and inadmissible hearsay material rather than admissible evidence; absent any evidence of an admission or interview record before the magistrate, the refusal to award costs was a misapplication of discretion, and the appeal is allowed with costs awarded to the appellant.
7 Aug 1998

HKSAR v. FUNG SAI LUNG

Citation

HKSAR v. FUNG SAI LUNG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA412/1998

The appeal court held the magistrate's factual conclusions were open on the evidence: the impostor theory was properly rejected, the appellant's admissions together with contextual details established membership, and while immediate custody was permissible the original 9‑month sentence was excessive and was reduced to 3 months imprisonment.