Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Turnbull guidelines

Legal area

Court

28 Jun 2024

香港特別行政區訴潘麗蓮

Citation

[2024] HKCA 588
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC87/2023

The conviction was upheld because the cumulative circumstantial evidence—applicant's personal documents and family items in an undisturbed bag containing controlled drugs and packaging, the applicant's admission of ownership of parts of the wallet, PW1's descriptive corroboration, and the applicant's failure to give a sworn explanation—made the inference of possession and trafficking the only reasonable inference beyond reasonable doubt; objections about identification procedure, absence of forensic traces and disclosure did not undermine the safety of the conviction.
18 Apr 2024

香港特別行政區訴張永富

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1261
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA482/2023

The conviction was upheld because, on rehearing, the court concluded that the totality of evidence — the P2 video despite limited facial detail, matching clothing and footwear, physical features, timings and circumstantial factors — produced an irresistible and rational inference that the appellant was the intruder depicted in P2, establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt; the trial judge's identification findings were not overturned.
19 Jan 2023

香港特別行政區訴王嘉麟及另一人

Citation

[2023] HKCA 99
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC213/2021

The Court accepted the trial judge's finding that PW1–PW4 were honest and reliable, that objective video evidence corroborated the presence of an unlawful assembly and the blocking of the road, and that discrepancies in peripheral details did not undermine the core identification of A2; accordingly A2's application for leave to appeal against conviction was refused and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
20 Oct 2020

HKSAR v. WONG CHI ON

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2617
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA244/2019

The conviction was unsafe and must be quashed because the sole critical witness was shown to be error-prone and adamant about facts contradicted by CCTV, there were unresolved concerns about identification and date of the offence, and reliance on that unreliable single witness created a lurking doubt as to guilt.
25 Sept 2020

香港特別行政區訴呂偉龍

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 2338
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA539/2019

The court upheld the conviction: the trial judge properly found the child complainant credible and the identification reliable based on multiple encounters and a reliable recognition procedure; the touching was deliberate not accidental; although the judge erred in attributing the October incident to the appellant, that error was immaterial to the safety of the conviction because the identification from the November/December encounter and the February incident together proved identity beyond reasonable doubt, and the judge applied Turnbull caution appropriately.
21 Aug 2020

香港特別行政區訴余文龍

Citation

[2020] HKDC 757
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCC818/2019

The identification evidence (CCTV and eyewitness identification) was of poor quality and inherently weak, and there was no other evidence to support the identifications; accordingly the prosecution evidence taken at its highest was insufficient for a properly directed jury to convict, so the judge must stop the case and find no case to answer.
3 Jan 2020

香港特別行政區訴鄧理維

Citation

[2020] HKCFI 572
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA260/2019

The conviction was upheld because the trial judge correctly applied the Turnbull criteria, accepted the credible testimony of the eyewitness, and had objective corroboration from CCTV showing sufficient opportunity, lighting and conduct to identify the appellant; those factual findings were not irrational or unsupported and therefore the appeal was dismissed.
6 Aug 2019

HKSAR v. ISLAM, MOHAMMAD JAHIRUL

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 1917
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA56/2019

The Magistrate's findings that PW1 was credible, that identification was reliable under Turnbull, and that the appellant's conduct constituted taking employment while subject to a removal order were not plainly wrong; the rejection of DW's evidence as inherently improbable was justified, therefore the conviction is upheld.
10 Apr 2019

HKSAR v. ABDULLAH, MOHAMMAD

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 918
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA526/2018

The magistrate's factual finding that the Appellant was the blue polo top male who served PW1 and that those acts amounted to taking employment while unlawfully in Hong Kong was supported by the evidence (PW1's continuous observation) and not plainly wrong; therefore the conviction was safe and the appeal must be dismissed.
28 Dec 2018

HKSAR v. EJEGI EDWIN ROBORT

Citation

[2018] HKCFI 2838
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA90/2018

The Court held the magistrate had regard to the Turnbull factors, and PW1's identification was recognition-based, made at close range, in good lighting, for a sufficient duration, and by an officer who had seen the appellant repeatedly; the absence of fingerprint/CCTV/internal records was not fatal. Therefore the magistrate's finding was not plainly wrong and the conviction was safe.